Faith - Honor - Truth

When transgenderism trumps common sense

Sat, 22 Apr 2023 00:20:18 GMT

WHEN TRANSGENDERISM TRUMPS COMMON SENSE

James G. Zumwalt / April 21, 2023

World Net Daily ... Parenthood has blessed me four times in life – twice in my 30s, via the old-fashioned way, and twice in my 60s, via adoptions. Now in my 70s, I am disturbed to find parenting skills challenged in some locations by dangerous wokeist influences.

Never did I think applying basic common sense – i.e., banning children from making a life-changing decision when their minds are not fully capable of understanding the consequences of doing so – would be chastised.

When parents have more than one child, efforts are made to avoid any demonstration of favoritism toward one over another. A parent seeks to be equally loving toward all to avoid discord and unfairness.

A parent – even an aging one – endeavors with young children to maintain a level playing field as much as possible on the homefront. So, it is shocking to see our schools demonstrate clear favoritism toward transgender females today, denying biological female athletes the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.

This is permitted because a biological male, discovering he can no longer psychologically fit into his birth suit, seeks to transfer out of it to compete with the physically less-competitive sporting gender. Lest this be considered a sexist comment, far fewer transgender men have won major male championships than transgender women have won major female championships.

Accordingly, consider how devastating this is for biological female athletes to see such favoritism exhibited as they are unfairly required to compete against transgender women who, as biological men, have markedly higher testosterone levels.

The good news this week is that House Republicans passed a bill – H.R. 734 – the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act – seeking to ban transgender girls and women from participating in female athletic programs. But, as the bill passed in the Republican-controlled House by a party-line vote of 219-203, the bad news is it is unlikely to be taken up by a U.S. Senate controlled by Democrats.

Even if it were shockingly taken up and passed by the Senate, President Joe Biden has promised to veto it.

The bill seeks to amend Title IX – the federal civil rights law which in 1972 banned sex-based discrimination in education, allowing women to compete in their own individual sports – by recognizing sex as being "based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth."

Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Minn., noted , "House Republicans today passed this bill to protect the safety and fairness that we should have in women's sports and to make sure that no female athlete is ever forced to compete against a biological male, period." However, as the vote indicated, such common sense was not shared by 203 Democrats.

Since 2020, 21 states have voted to prevent transgender athletes from playing on sports teams inconsistent with their birth gender with dozens more states having similar bills in progress. Democrats appear not to sense the direction in which the wind of common sense is blowing – and has been blowing since time began.

Interestingly, even two radical liberal feminist groups – the Women's Liberation and Women's Declaration International USA – both agree with the bill and not with Biden.

Just like science – and, thus, common sense – tells us, there are but two genders. It also tells us any large and free society will never produce a "single population fits all" round peg for itself. Transgenderism is a fact of life and, as such, common sense tells us those embracing it must be treated as equal members of society.

However, equality means just that – it does not mean giving special equity (i.e., diversity status) to those not fitting the round peg profile simply for doing so.

Take, for example, the recent airing of a new television program on CNN, titled "Searching for Mexico."

"Desperate Housewives" co-star Eva Longoria hosted the program, which highlighted a group of "two-spirited" cooks in Oaxaca, known locally as "Muxes." Appearing to share much of the same characteristics of transgender males, Muxes "identify as a third gender" from a young age, according to Longoria.

One Muxe described them as "...people of two spirits. We are the duality, neither man nor woman. You are neither less nor more."

Longoria celebrated the fact that male Muxes take on "traditionally female roles within the family, becoming caregivers, needleworkers and, most importantly, cooks." She shared a bit about their dating lives – which are kept secret. They attest to going out with heterosexual men whom they view as "more manly."

But why does CNN promote a program under the guise of a group's unique cooking talents, all really to promote its transgenderism? It is not unlike parents intentionally favoring one child.

The biggest danger in exposing immature student minds to transgenderism is the tendency for such minds to embrace it as a fad or an effort to earn favoritism from teachers pushing it upon them. We have heard horror stories of young children who were encouraged to take the transgender plunge, only to deeply regret the irreversible body-altering treatment later.

In 1896, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued a racist decision. In Plessy v. Ferguson, despite the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause banning states from denying "equal protection" to any person in their jurisdictions, separately designated train cars for whites and blacks were deemed constitutional as long as they were "equal."

It took more than half a century for SCOTUS to see otherwise, reversing Plessy v. Ferguson in 1954. In Brown v. Board of Education, it determined equal means just that – equal – separate be damned. Ironically, we will have to await a future SCOTUS decision concerning the Title IX issue above as to whether when referencing genders, separate means just that – separate – equal be damned.

Only time will tell how many more females will be robbed of championship titles or placements by transgender women who, due to an absence of common sense by decision-makers, are enabled to exercise an unfair advantage by trumping it.

Is Britain's city of Leicester a 'canary in the coal mine'?

Thu, 20 Apr 2023 00:25:54 GMT

IS BRITAIN'S CITY OF LEICESTER A "CANARY IN THE COAL MINE?"

James G. Zumwalt / April 19, 2023

World Net Daily ... Ironic to think it could come to this but if Leicester, England, is the "canary in the coal mine" for the future of the country's democracy, it will take a future generation of "rational thinking" wokeists, if such an animal exists, to turn things around – assuming it is not too late to do so.

To understand what has befallen Leicester, England's 10th-largest city, we must go back to the beginning of this century.

In 2001, as Muslims fleeing Middle East turmoil settled in England, Leicester became a magnet for them.

A Muslim population of 11% spread like wildfire, increasing to 20% by 2017. En route to getting there, along with attracting other minorities, Leicester was described in a 2007 U.K. newspaper article as "the first city where white people are a minority."

That same newspaper noted in 2013 the transition occurring there...

..."Leicester has become the poster city for multicultural Britain, a place where the stunning number and size of the minorities – the 55 mosques, 18 Hindu temples, nine Sikh gurudwaras, two synagogues, two Buddhist centres and one Jain centre...

...are seen not as a recipe for conflict or a millstone around the city's neck, but a badge of honour."

A stunning sign of this transition was evidenced by the evolution of "no-go" zones where native Brits are unwelcome to go, and those pointing out their existence were attacked for doing so. In the 21st century, for the first time since A.D. 597, England no longer is considered a Christian majority nation.

A combination of low native birth and high immigration rates have changed the country's religious profile.

Sadly, the woke supporters of multiculturalism, rather than creating a cultural utopia where everyone can just get along, instead created a cultural battlefield.

Chaos has erupted on city streets. Muslim mobs have been targeting Hindu temples and private homes with acts of violence and vandalism as they seek to establish local dominance, supersizing isolated neighborhood no-go zones into a single city-size one – and beyond.

As such violence and intolerance of other religions rears its ugly head in Leicester, the wokeists who opened the doors for this to happen remain silent.

Just like they worked hard to intimidate those native critics who opposed multiculturalism as Islamophobic, Muslims now intimidate critics expressing concerns about Islam's spreading influence by both words and physical actions.

If it only took a generation to transition England from a Christian majority to a non-Christian majority nation; it is worrisome to think what could happen to the country in the decades ahead as Leicester becomes the norm rather than the exception.

In England, plagues like COVID will seem inconsequential in the face of Muslim influences that become a cancer, preaching intolerance of other religions and encouraging violence to minimize them.

Those in the U.S. seeking to dismiss the above as a European problem naively do so.

This was demonstrated last year when an unidentified college art professor at Hamline University in Saint Paul, Minnesota, giving appropriate trigger warnings beforehand, circulated a 14th-century Persian illustration online of "Muhammad Receiving His First Revelation From the Angel Gabriel."

The professor explained the purpose in showing the illustration was, while some Muslims are offended over any depictions of Prophet Muhammad, others are not, thus demonstrating "there is no one, monothetic culture."

When the former group claimed they were offended, the professor's contract was not renewed as a result. One Muslim student claimed that the professor's intent is immaterial, that "the impact is what matters," and she, accordingly, felt victimized.

The university has received considerable criticism for its decision.

While Muslim intolerance is silencing free speech at Hamline University, other worrisome signs of Muslim intolerance have been manifesting themselves around the U.S. for years also in the form of no-go zones.

A 2015 news article expressed concerns about these zones popping up in the United States where Muslim clerics mandate Shariah law be applied. Some of these clerics brazenly post signs warning entry by non-Muslims into the zones is submission to Islamic law.

Dearborn, Michigan, where 45% of the population is Muslim, has given rise to such zones.

The above article goes on to report these zones "are now self-governing in a 'voluntary apartheid' by shutting themselves into closed societies and then demanding immunity from our criticism and our courts" – which "they are getting away with."

In allowing this to happen, Western nations endorse "honor killings, domestic violence, sexual abuse of children and female genital mutilations" – which Shariah sanctions.

No-go zones are puzzle pieces that look to come together in Western countries, initially on a local level, establishing acceptance before expanding on a much wider level – a goal unending until in place on a national level.

As these puzzle pieces come together, will we see a future generation of woke activists, who recognize this process has us gradually surrendering our democracy, triggered into action to stop them?

If Leicester is democracy's warning provided by the canary in the coal mine, its speed of Muslimization suggests wokeism's activists will be unlikely to speak up in time, if they ever do at all.

Today's Guardians of Truth: An Endangered Species

Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:31:07 GMT

AMERICA'S GUARDIANS OF TRUTH: AN ENDANGERED SPECIES

James G. Zumwalt / April 12, 2023

World Net Daily ... Turkish journalist Can Dundar and a German-based broadcasting company have created a documentary series entitled "Guardians of Truth." It shares stories about people around the world who courageously stood up for freedom of speech.

Dundar himself has paid a high price for doing so. As editor-in-chief of a daily Turkish newspaper, he published a true story about President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shipping weapons to Syria.

For two decades, an autocratic Erdogan has been tightening his grasp on power, initially as prime minister and currently as president. His near carte blanche control of the country's institutions, including the judiciary, resulted in Dundar being tried in absentia for publishing the story and receiving a prison sentence of 27 years.

For many of the subjects in the documentary series, America has long served as a source of inspiration for free speech and their ultimate decision to take on the fight within their own countries. It is sadly ironic, however, the American institutions traditionally serving as their model guardians of truth have now fallen from grace.

While the subjects of the series endeavor, at great personal risk, to continue to strive for truth, they see American guardians today no longer treasuring it, embracing fake news, misinformation and disinformation to promote a liberal mindset.

America's historic guardians of truth – the government, the media and our educational institutions – have undergone such change, one wonders whether the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is still applicable.

The continuing release of Twitter Files underscores how Joe Biden, both before and after winning the 2020 presidential election, worked closely with the social media to divert negative publicity about him and his family to negate its impact on voters.

The mainstream media (MSM) over the years has made it abundantly clear it leans left with over five times as many members identifying as liberal rather than conservative. Fake news has run rampant within the MSM, lowering trust across party lines. Despite being newer to the game than establishment media, the social media have displayed a similar leftist bent.

Both these media sources have fed a leftist ideology, either by manipulating truth to publish fake news or by undermining any effort to publish conservative viewpoints or to promote candidates of that ilk.

One would think a place where conservative views could be openly aired would be our educational institutions, but many such institutions have actively participated in banning conservative voices as well.

Ironically, one of the major universities that took on an active role in the 1960s to ensure anti-Vietnam War voices were heard was the University of California at Berkeley. Yet 21st century Berkeley has been banning conservative views, triggering lawsuits.

A recent revelation suggests leftist groups have taken things to a new low, backed by dark money from the Democratic Party, to quietly promote misinformation.

The term "misinformation" is defined as "false information that is spread, regardless of intent to mislead." A consulting firm – Arabella Advisors – tied to the Democratic Party manages funds that support academic and independent research into online misinformation, predominantly targeting conservatives' online presence.

Unsurprisingly, many Arabella-funded research projects cite conservatives as the predominant purveyors of misinformation with several recommending solutions to mitigate its spread, including censorship. By doing so, these groups weaponize charitable laws and tax exemption regulations in their push for Democratic electoral victories.

American politics of the 21st century have become a dirty game.

Substantive discussions on issues have given way to unfairly silencing one entire side of the debate. It smacks of the same approach Democrats took in establishing their January 6 House investigative select committee. That committee's mission clearly was to promote only one side of the issue – that President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing, while totally disregarding any evidence to the contrary.

With our own Guardians of Truth becoming an endangered species, America is shamelessly showing signs of transitioning to a one-party system in the 21st century.

Liberals' hypocritical police policy: If threatened, 'Who you gonna call?'

Sat, 08 Apr 2023 11:24:09 GMT

LIBERALS' HYPOCRITICAL POLICE POLICY: IF THREATENED, "WHO YOU GONNA CALL?"

James G. Zumwalt / April 5, 2023

World Net Daily ... A great comedy film of 1984 was "Ghostbusters." The first stanza of the movie's song asked a question of import to one plagued by ghosts: "If there's something strange in your neighborhood, who you gonna call?" It then advised, call "Ghostbusters!"

Similarly, in the world of reality, when one feels threatened by the words or actions of another person, "Who you gonna call?" Logically, we have been programmed to call the police. However, if one is a liberal politician who feels so threatened but has established a reputation for undermining police credibility by calling for their defunding, "who you gonna call?"

One would envision such liberal politicians, in need of law enforcement help quickly, knowing they have done everything in their power to undermine such authority, would find themselves on the horns of a dilemma when confronted with a perceived threat.

Realizing they've beaten the anti-police drum, they will look pretty hypocritical now, when immediate police assistance is needed, putting in that 911 call.

Doing so would convey the contrary message that despite their anti-law enforcement rhetoric, there is a very real need in a civilized society where law-abiding citizens cohabitate with a small percentage of law-breaking citizens, there will always be a need for law enforcement assistance.

So then what does the liberal politician seeking to defund police do when police assistance is needed? Does the politician opt to underscore the defund campaign by refusing to call for help? Or, does he or she bite the bullet, recognizing law enforcement is there for an absolutely necessary purpose in providing safety and security when it is needed?

The question for the liberal politician, then, is "who you gonna call?"

A review of numerous threatening incidents occurring within districts where politicians have promoted "defund the police" movements are most telling in this regard.

These incidents in which such politicians felt personally threatened demonstrated they have taken the "hypocritical" oath of office by calling for defunding out of one side of their mouth while demanding greater for police action out of the other side:

One such politician who, ever since the 2020 death of George Floyd in the custody of arresting officers, has clamored to defund police has been San Francisco Supervisor Hillary Ronen. She has put in several calls for law enforcement to increase policing in the Mission District, where she lives.

Despite being responsible for decreased police funding (the city redirected $120 million) that has reduced security in her district, Ronen reported she felt betrayed when she was informed there was insufficient staff to allocate to her neighborhood.

As if oblivious to the fallout from her own actions, she criticized everyone else for the unsafe situation. And, most outrageously, she still continues to promote police defunding.

The very vocal anti-police advocate Los Angeles City Councilman Hugo Soto-Martinez had the nerve to call for special police protection for his Lexus. U.S. Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., called for defunding while receiving special police patrols at his home.

Audacious police defunder Assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou, D-Lower Manhattan, although living in Harlem, campaigned from a wealthier part of Manhattan due to "safety issues." Now she demands better protection in Harlem.

Self-described socialist Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant is another qualified hypocrite. She is one of the city's most prominent anti-police activists.

As if police do not have enough on their hands, she demands police track down the offender who is tossing human feces into her yard – a threat for which she feels police protection is warranted – all while still calling for defunding. She threatens to file a complaint as police have yet to investigate the matter.

When a gun-toting man threatened Rep. Prima Jayapal, D-Wash., she understandably wasted no time calling police who arrested him. Yet it is incongruous for her to initially push for defunding before later pressing for funding reductions, reallocating money for social services that prioritize housing, homelessness, mental health, etc. – all problems reduced forces would then be unable to address.

Despite the anti-police rhetoric (calling them "stormtroopers") of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who had one of her congressional lieutenants accuse police of being "inherently racist and need to be abolished," her husband, Paul, called police when an assailant broke into his home – their presence saving Paul from much more serious injury.

On the police defunding bandwagon as well are congressional members of "The Squad," such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, known as AOC, D-N.Y. While they have no problem reducing police availability for the public by defunding, members like AOC spend over $100,000 for personal security.

Despite having such funding available, she still trashed police about being harassed on the Capitol steps by a conservative comedian "seeking extremist fame." In doing so, he let her hypocrisy show through as only days earlier she had ridiculed Supreme Court Justice Brent Kavanaugh after he had been harassed and forced to leave a restaurant.

These hypocritical politicians do not seem to grasp the fact that defunding and denigrating police has direct consequences, having caused en masse retirements and resignations, leaving many departments undermanned. Accordingly, police have had to limit their responsiveness, even to 911 calls.

Tragically, such political rhetoric has also further endangered police officers as reflected by the number of those killed in the line of duty. Officers are dying violently at a greater rate today than they were 10 years ago, undoubtedly in part due the actions of police haters encouraged by defund the police politicians.

It is totally irresponsible for such anti-police politicians to call for defunding before even offering a reasonable alternative. It has been suggested, where domestic disputes are involved, consideration be given to sending unarmed counselors with some psychiatric expertise rather than armed police. This, again, is irresponsible as such disputes can easily turn violent.

It will only take the killing of a few such counselors before the reality of this misguided policy sets in for anti-police advocates.

Putin’s Deportations Rob Ukraine of a Future Generation

Sat, 01 Apr 2023 16:56:39 GMT

PUTIN'S DEPORTATIONS ROB UKRAINE OF A FUTURE GENERATION

James G. Zumwalt / April 1, 2023

Breitbart News ... As is often the case in war, among those hardest hit – especially in an invasion – are the children. And while nuclear families tend to look out for their own, those who suffer the most are the orphans.

Ukrainian orphans were no exception to this when Russia invaded in February 2022, but what was most disconcerting to those of us familiar with Russia’s history were its intentions for these children. The alarm quickly led to a small army of non-governmental organization (NGO) volunteers rushing to Ukraine to stymy Moscow’s attempt to deport as many of the orphans as possible.

A recent Russian propaganda video attempted to hide the fate these children are suffering. It cloaked the deportations under the facade of removing Ukrainian orphans from the war zone to safety inside Russia – there to be adopted.

The Yale Human Rights Lab published a report that gives a far darker side of this deportation initiative. It indicates that more than 6,000 Ukrainian children have been sent to 43 different reeducation camps in Russia with one purpose only: brainwashing.

The Russian camps seek to erase from the orphans’ young minds all thoughts of Ukrainian independence and nationalism, replacing them with a pro-Russian mindset.

Any hope older Ukrainian children trapped there may have of escaping and returning to their homeland will be dashed once they learn these camps are spread all across Russia, with two located in Siberia and another 25 percent situated more than 500 miles from the border of Ukraine.

Russian forces tend to arrive at Ukrainian orphanages unexpectedly to corral children before they can be hidden by their Ukrainian caretakers. In one such incident, CNN reported how hospital workers reportedly deceptively foiled the Russians.

They had prepared medical records in advance for many of the children, falsely showing they were suffering from a range of serious maladies. Accordingly, these fictitious “unhealthy” children were allegedly left behind by their would-be abductors.

The Russians historically have resorted to a deportation policy when occupying neighboring countries unfavorably disposed toward them in an effort to undermine future hostilities. Soviet leader Josef Stalin’s Operation Pribol, implemented in 1949 after occupying the Baltic states, deported women and children to Russia.

The intent was to limit the breeding of a future generation of anti-Soviet fighters and to redirect children’s loyalties towards Russia, although many deportees died in labor camps. By the time Operation Pribol ended, two percent of the entire population of the three Baltic states had been deported.

Russia’s deportation policy in the Baltic states was complemented by a policy bolstering its influence there through marriage, teaching the Russian language, and building Russian communities which later were used to justify any subsequent occupation by Moscow under the pretense of protecting them.

This is the same justification Putin gave for a “special military operation” into Ukraine and the later annexation of four Ukrainian regions last year: to protect Russians from “ genocide .” In the Baltic states, this strategy by Moscow resulted in 25.2 percent of Latvians and 24.8 percent of Estonians now being of Russian descent.

As more than one percent of Ukraine’s underaged population consists of orphans, housed across the country in over 700 facilities, NGOs like Aerial Recovery Group ( ARG ) acted quickly after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine to explore what could be done to keep the children safe.

My son, James, a Navy veteran who had earned the Bronze Star for defusing over 150 explosive devices in Iraq, was a member of the first ARG group to go in to coordinate a child recovery plan with the government.

While the Ukrainians welcomed ARG, Kyiv laid down some ground rules. These included not taking the children outside the country and ensuring they were accompanied at all times by a native caretaker.

The first concern was based on the lack of citizenship documentation for the children and the presence of international child sex trafficking rings operating just outside Ukraine’s border, hovering like vultures to snatch unwary victims.

Despite their limited resources, ARG volunteers did an amazing job of transporting several hundred orphans out of harm’s way. They spent numerous sleepless nights doing so, operating under the radar while traversing some very dangerous territory, never knowing if Russian forces would be encountered.

So impressive was the ARG operation, I and another former Marine, David Decker, with whom I had gone through basic training more than half a century earlier, volunteered to assist at the border in April of 2022.

While the much younger ARG volunteers referred to us as “Grandpa 1” and “Grandpa 2” (affectionately, we think), we all shared a common perception. It was one of admiration for these orphans who faced adversity with tremendous courage.

We could not help but reflect on the stark contrast they represented to the whining woke snowflakes back in the U.S., regularly complaining about things that were so inconsequential compared to the daily life-threatening experiences and unknown future these orphans faced.

Fortunately, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has not been fooled by Russia’s propaganda, issuing an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin and his Commissioner for Children’s Rights based on “the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children” to Russia.

The warrant’s actual impact, as far as the U.S. and Russia are concerned, is uncertain in that neither country signed the Rome Statute, which created the ICC.

For Grandpa 1 and Grandpa 2, our experiences with Ukrainian orphans reinforced the fact we have been blessed in reaching the sunset years of our lives in good health. Nonetheless, we often pause to reflect upon the ultimate fate thousands of young Ukrainian orphans – only in the sunrise years of their lives – are facing.

Putin knows his military has become an international embarrassment. An invasion that was to take a matter of weeks, if not days, is now in its second year. In fighting a war of attrition, Russia, with its much larger population, gives Putin a major advantage.

However, the fact that he has deported thousands of Ukrainian children to Russia for brainwashing and continues to do so suggests he, like Stalin, is embracing a long-term solution in Ukraine as well. In doing so, he robs that country of a generation of its children.

Wokeism: As intolerant as the Taliban

Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:04:59 GMT

WOKEISM: AS INTOLERANT AS THE TALIBAN

James G. Zumwalt / March 29, 2023

World Net Daily ... In March of 2001, the international community was shocked to witness the Taliban destroy two magnificent statues carved, centuries earlier, into a mountainside in central Afghanistan. The Buddhas of Bamiyan included a smaller statue (125 feet) and larger one (180 feet), both of which were built in approximately the sixth century.

The reason for their destruction was that they violated Islam's ban against idolatry. An historical treasure was lost that day as 21st century "woke" Islamists fulfilled their religion's extremist interpretation that is intolerant of all other religions. For them, Islam is the only global religion.

Sadly, woke activists in 21st century America have pretty much mirrored the Taliban's intolerance by deeming as unfit for display statues, memorials or busts of earlier generations of Americans who failed to hold dear, back in their time, the same values these activists do today.

Initially, actively defacing such displays before undergoing an evolutionary process of their own, these activists now express their displeasure by demanding those objects' removal.

They dismiss the logic that, just like man has gone through an evolutionary process allowing him to achieve the ability to walk erect, the values man has embraced throughout history have gone through a similar evolutionary process.

It is a sign of evolutionary intellectualism that man's values since America's founding have expanded from one of racial exclusivity to one inclusive of all humanity; however, it is a sign of intellectual regression that those living today choose to hold those living before the evolutionary process began to a not-yet-evolved 21st century values standard. Yet this is exactly what is happening.

With wokeism protesting any memorialization of those who fought for the Confederacy during our American Civil War, a magnificent memorial in Arlington National Cemetery is, like the Buddhas of Bamiyan, being slated for demolition.

More than a century old, the 32-foot-high Confederate Memorial was enthusiastically promoted by an earlier Congress, three U.S. presidents and veterans on both sides after the conflict. It was specifically embraced to symbolize a unified America in the aftermath of the War Between the States.

The Confederate Memorial was actually the brainchild of Union veteran and U.S. President William McKinley; it was President William Howard Taft who spoke at the laying of its cornerstone; and it was President Woodrow Wilson who spoke at its 1914 dedication, alongside both Union and Confederate veterans.

Almost half a century after a war that had so divided America, claiming 750,000 lives and the maiming of over a million more, this memorial recognized a nation's reconciliation and reunification.

Designed and constructed by Confederate veteran and internationally renowned Jewish sculptor Moses Ezekiel, he, along with three other Southerners, lie buried at the monument's base, thus serving as their headstone. It is a grave marker also for 462 other Confederates whose graves are arranged in concentric circles around it.

Such a burial arrangement is an integral part of the memorial just as Congress, three presidents and veterans from both sides intended. Those today planning the memorial's destruction lack any appreciation for the emotions at play in 1914 or for the artistic value it was intended to offer and does offer.

Hypocritically, woke activists, demanding those who fought for the South more than seven generations earlier be banned to the dustbin of history for failing to grasp 21st century values, fail to grasp the emotional needs existing in 1914 to honor all who served to help reunify a divided nation.

They are committed to the memorial's destruction at a cost of over $100 million. Meanwhile, opponents of its destruction filed a lawsuit on Feb. 16, 2023, alleging numerous violations of the law and overreaching by the Department of Defense.

In the aftermath of the 2020 death of George Floyd while being taken into custody by police, woke activists began campaigning to eradicate memorials to those who fought for the South during our Civil War. In Richmond, Virginia, which served as the South's capital during that conflict, every public Confederate monument has now been removed.

The statue of Confederate Gen. A.P. Hill, erected in 1891 – caused more of a problem than others since the general's remains were interred beneath it. But with the support of a far-left Richmond mayor and a Circuit Court judge, the body was removed.

The woke activist campaign has been allowed to extend its memorial removal power to other historic figures such as our Founding Fathers, Christopher Columbus, President Theodore Roosevelt and even "The Great Emancipator" himself – President Abraham Lincoln.

Sins are being committed on both sides – the woke activists seeking to erase historical figures who failed to respect a value system America did not come to embrace until modern times and the silent majority that has allowed them to do it. However, the greater sin is that of the former, evidenced by their efforts to remove the Confederate Memorial.

By so doing, they ignore any sense of respect for those – on both sides of the Civil War's battlefield – whose emotional wounds were healing through reunification, triggering the memorial's joint dedication by veterans representing a unified America.

Did you hear about the 'stabbing' of the San Diego imam?

Sat, 25 Mar 2023 00:07:11 GMT

DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THE "STABBING" OF THE SAN DIEGO IMAM?

James G. Zumwalt / March 24, 2023

World Net Daily ... Chances are you did not hear about the stabbing of an imam in San Diego because, despite his claim to followers the incident occurred at the hands of an "Islamophobic" attacker on March 23, 2022, neither the police nor the district attorney have any record such a stabbing event.

Sheikh Uthman ibn Farooq is a Muslim scholar and iman known to preach on the streets of San Diego, inviting people to convert to Islam. A video ibn Farooq recorded, apparently after a public appearance, shows a man approaching his car, calling him a "f***ing terrorist," before the imam was allegedly stabbed by the assailant.

Quick on the draw to criticize America for Islamophobia whenever a Muslim is victimized was the San Diego chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

While its mission is to protect civil rights for Muslims, enhance understanding of Islam, promote justice and empower American Muslims, it condemned the "apparently bias-motivated attack," expressing concerns over a steady rise in hate crimes.

In a video the imam released to the public, he claims the attacker followed him in his car to a gas station. As the man approached, with a mask on, ibn Farooq for some reason began filming. While the actual stabbing is not shown on the video and the imam reveals a bandage on his stomach area, he claims he went to the hospital and that a police report was filed.

He also reported the attacker had been arrested, pleaded guilty and had been incarcerated. Mysteriously, police have absolutely no record of any such report being made either about the attack or about the arrest of and confession by any suspect.

Some critics believe the attack never occurred. One is the publication Focus on Western Islamism (FWI), which, on Nov. 27, offered $5,000 to ibn Farooq to provide any evidence to support his claims that the attack took place and the attacker was apprehended

But the imam has been evasive in accepting the offer, failing to do so before the Nov. 30, 2022, deadline. We already know he cannot produce a police report on the incident and he has yet to reveal where he received medical attention afterward.

FWI's managing editor, Dexter Van Zile, condemned CAIR for its quick condemnation as both it and ibn Farooq seem only to be using the claim "to falsely portray the United States as a dangerous place for Muslims to practice their faith." He criticizes the mainstream media for failing to follow up on the story as well.

In December 2021, actor Jussie Smollett was convicted of falsely reporting a hate crime he had staged to suggest he had been attacked by whites because he was a gay black man.

Perhaps ibn Farooq learned from Smollett's false reporting conviction that, to escape criminal charges for reporting a religious hatred hoax, he simply needed to avoid reporting it while professing its occurrence to a sympathetic public.

Another race with Russia to the seafloor

Wed, 22 Mar 2023 23:47:27 GMT

ANOTHER RACE WITH RUSSIA TO THE SEAFLOOR

James G. Zumwalt / March 22, 2023

World Net Daily ... Espionage has been described as the "second-oldest profession." Clearly, ever since the earliest conflicts, man has come to value the need for such a skill so as not to be ultimately surprised later by an enemy's capabilities upon the battlefield.

It was a skill Gen. George Washington recognized and effectively used to defeat the British during the American Revolution. It's an even more critical capability to maintain in today's world due to the numerous technological advances being made with weaponry.

During the Cold War, when the U.S. and Russia suffered the accidental loss of advanced weaponry at sea, both sides raced to locate it and secretly undertake recovery operations – one side seeking to gain intelligence from doing so, the other trying to prevent it. Just such a race is underway today due to a U.S. military MQ-9 Reaper surveillance drone that crashed into the Black Sea on March 14.

The U.S. claims the drone was intercepted over international waters by two Su-27 Russian jets. Upon doing so, the jets recklessly flew around it, conducting unsafe maneuvers that included the dumping of fuel on the Reaper, eventually causing its propeller to become inoperable. U.S. controllers had to glide it down to the water where it is believed to have sunk to a depth of 5,000 feet.

Moscow denies the U.S. claim, suggesting it was the unmanned drone's "sharp maneuvering" that was responsible for the crash. Video released by the Pentagon of the incident clearly supports the U.S. version of the facts. As the encounter lasted 30-40 minutes, it is believed this was not some random act by a rogue Russian pilot but rather an intentional one ordered by the Kremlin.

Russia has accused the U.S. of entering into an area Moscow recently declared to be restricted; however, it is doubtful the US will respect any such declaration as recovery operations for the drone are mounted.

The debris from this technologically advanced surveillance platform is an intelligence prize Russia seeks to recover while the U.S. rushes to get to it first.

It is believed, as controllers glided the Reaper into the water, they had sufficient time to undertake an important step – remotely erasing its very sensitive software; but, nonetheless, recovery of the aerial platform itself would still provide Moscow with an intelligence windfall.

It is why the Russians immediately deployed ships and aircraft to the vicinity of the crash site in an effort to recover the $32 million drone.

The United States and Russia have a long history of attempting to recover one another's technologically advanced weaponry lost at sea. While much of what has been done remains classified, details about two operations undertaken in 1976, eventually made public, are noteworthy.

That year, parts of an F-14 fighter aircraft were lost from the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier, along with an advanced AIM-54A air-to-air missile, which the Soviets were eager to recover and examine. Fortunately at that time, the U.S. had in service the NR-1 – a miniature nuclear submarine used for numerous classified missions.

While the sub's existence was long kept quiet, it had proven its worth on several occasions.

NR-1 entered into a circular search pattern from where it was believed the F-14 had come to rest on the ocean floor. The aircraft and its missile were eventually found, but with one most telling addition. The plane had netting around it – an indication the Soviets had apparently found it first and, while attempting to haul it up, had it break loose, once again sinking to the depths below.

One of the most audacious attempted recovery operations by the U.S. occurred that same year – eight years after the Soviet submarine K-129 had disappeared in the Pacific Ocean in 1968.

Because the sub carried three of the Soviet Union's R-21 nuclear-tipped submarine-launched ballistic missiles – the first missiles capable of being launched while the submarine was still submerged – it would be a major intelligence coup for the U.S. if recovered. At the time of K-129's loss, despite extensive efforts, the Soviets failed to find her, eventually calling off their search months later.

Unknown to the Soviets, however, years earlier the U.S. had planted underwater listening devices at various locations on the seafloor to monitor Soviet submarines. These devices had picked up the sound of the K-129 imploding. Thus, our search for her was narrowed down to a five mile radius.

After the Soviets ended their search, a U.S. sub was able to locate the K-129's wreckage. By examining it, the CIA determined the K-129 was sufficiently intact despite its three mile deep plunge to justify a recovery attempt.

The CIA immediately began planning a recovery operation. It involved constructing a mission-specific recovery ship, Glomar Explorer , equipped with a giant claw, with which to haul the K-129 up. With the help of the eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes, the agency developed a cover story that the Glomar Explorer was being built by him to conduct underwater mining operations.

After six years, Glomar Explorer lay anchored over the sunken submarine and began hauling it up. While doing so, however, several hooks on the claw broke, sending most of the 300-foot sub – including the important missile silos – back down into the abyss. Only about a 40-foot section of it was ultimately recovered.

A second recovery effort to be conducted later had to be aborted as the media went public with the story despite being asked by the CIA to await the sub's full recovery. Although details were never disclosed, reportedly a wealth of intelligence was still obtained from the recovered section.

There have been numerous incidents involving the loss of technology at sea that have triggered a race to the ocean floor by the U.S. and Russia to achieve an intelligence coup by recovering it.

However, until the loss of the Reaper, all of these shared a common trait – they were lost as the sole result of mishaps experienced by the nation owning them.

Moscow's egregious act of interfering with the Reaper's flight and causing its loss, in violation of international law, takes such incidents to a whole new level of confrontation.

Since the days of the NR-1, there have been technological advances enhancing the ability to locate objects on the seafloor. While the search situs, near Crimea, favors Russia, let us hope the fact the Reaper lies deep below the surface favors U.S. search technology.

Watch 15-year-old boy take it to woke school board

Sat, 18 Mar 2023 17:06:37 GMT

WATCH 15-YEAR-OLD BOY TAKE IT TO "WOKE" SCHOOL BOARD

James G. Zumwalt / March 17, 2023

World Net Daily ... A 15-year-old male student, who had completed his first year of high school in Rosemount, Minnesota, was given five minutes to address his local woke school board.

Never have I ever heard a more articulate and composed teenager make more sense in talking to adults.

As someone victimized by the sting of liberal educators determined to jam their ideology down his throat, rejecting any effort to debate issues with him, he spoke passionately.

In a video circulated by the 1776 Project PAC – a group pushing back against the teaching of the 1619 Project and Critical Race Theory (CRT) – this young man eloquently explained to the board, in exactly the amount of time allotted, how students were not being given an education in his high school.

Instead, he explained, they were being force fed a damaging ideology. While he says the school will not admit what he explains, his comments are based on firsthand experiences.

Providing several examples supporting his claim, he concluded with an announcement that won him a loud round of applause by parents impressed by his presentation. His words not only need to be heard, and heeded, by teachers but also by our military leaders who are imposing the same worrisome ideology upon our troops.

The young man started by sharing what he was told on the first day of school, where the seeds of educators' "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion" (DEI) program were in full bloom. In an equity statement, the principal gave a "heartfelt" speech about everyone standing together. The principal mentioned all the races individually – except for one – and how much they matter.

The young student felt very "uncomfortable" by his principal's comments. Not only did his discomfort emanate from the fact the student was Caucasian – a race intentionally omitted despite most students there being white – but also having such emphasis placed on each student's skin color.

The student speaker explained, "To be clear, I don't need you to tell me that I matter, but hearing the condolences given to other races and leaving just one race out, inevitably you feel like you have done something wrong. … I was told that writing on the white board that 'all lives matter' could be seen as political and could be seen as offensive."

He said he was informed that writing lives of minorities matter was not similarly political because it promotes human rights.

But when the young man tried to get a response as to why the school's equity statement couldn't represent all students, "I was told that asking that question was offensive."

In his further effort to get a logical answer, he said, "I was told 'whites have a pretty good situation right now,'" leading him to query, "So is that not racism?"

The young speaker explained that due to being told over the school year that he was racist and privileged with the irreversible differences due to skin color repeatedly being emphasized, "I've never noticed race more – and it's becoming the first thing I notice when I meet someone, which has never before been the case."

The student was in an Honors Government class in which his teacher claimed that "Democrats care more about all people, while Republicans care only about themselves." That teacher also inferred that socialism is better than democracy, underscored by the fact there was a statue of a socialist leader in the classroom.

Interestingly, the student speaker had been told by fellow students that they went along with the school's agenda out of fear of getting a bad grade if they spoke out. He shared that even some teachers had told him they agree with him, but they also feared losing their job if they bucked the administration's agenda.

The student speaker challenged the school board to look in the mirror that evening and ask themselves, "Are you really standing up for the equality of all people, or are you just pushing a damaging political ideology on our students?"

Stating it is clear the school is pushing a leftist agenda, the speaker then made an announcement that won him the immediate congratulatory applause of those present. He said he was leaving the high school to attend a private Christian school.

While the student speaker acknowledged changing schools requires that he make sacrifices, like not being able to celebrate graduation with his current schoolmates, he justified his decision by adding, "I will be able to learn in an environment that is not intent on punishing me daily for my skin color and political views."

Apparently having planned out his career path already, the young man concluded by telling the board to think about what he has said because some day he intends to become a political leader.

"But," he added, "I will never stop believing that everybody has value no matter their skin color or personal beliefs, and it is going to be a shame" the school won't be able to claim him as a school alumnus when he launches his political career.

His speech brought out an important point: Wherever CRT and DEI are taught, critics fear exercising their free speech to debate them lest they be condemned as racists. Even former Disney CEO Bob Chapek, who felt pressured to embrace wokeism – much to the detriment of his shareholders – made this point.

It is no wonder some schools now are having financial problems as more parents are walking away from public education.

Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Sears, who is black, would agree with the student. She points out teachers are not doing their jobs as, by the time high schoolers go to college, 65% are in need of remedial education.

Meanwhile, in the student speaker's own state, two major school districts reported that at least 10 elementary and high schools did not have a single student achieve grade-level skills in math during the 2021-2022 school year.

It is doubtful I will still be around when this impressive young man runs for political office. But, no matter where my residence may be at that time, I will be pulling for his success to make a positive imprint upon our education system.

My only hope is that he can do so before it is too late to reverse the damaging trend set by irresponsible school boards.

Florida bill causes Democrats to confront their ugly history

Thu, 16 Mar 2023 01:11:29 GMT

FLORIDA BILL CAUSES DEMOCRATS TO CONFRONT THEIR UGLY HISTORY

James G. Zumwalt / March 15, 2023

World Net Daily ... While the bill will probably never become law, legislation proposed by a Republican member of the Florida State Senate, Blaise Ingoglia, has put liberal Democrats in a difficult position.

This is especially so for those who continue to malign our Founding Fathers and others in our history for their failure to have ended slavery long before it was made illegal.

We have witnessed these liberals either direct their anger against statues of early Americans by damaging them or against military bases named after such historical figures by insisting upon name changes simply because they were influenced by the values of their day rather than the human rights values with which 21st century Americans have been blessed.

These liberals fail to recognize that the journey for human rights in the U.S. has been evolutionary – one to which many earlier Americans, even our Founding Fathers who broke the colonial chains making us subservient to England's king, contributed, moving us forward in a positive direction to get where we are today.

But these liberals insist on assessing the journey in a vacuum by which every American since our war of independence was won is criticized for lacking the values of our day.

Their solution is to remove these leaders, and any semblance of memorializing them, from our presence. Our Founding Fathers , Confederate leaders during the American Civil War and even President and Medal of Honor recipient Theodore Roosevelt have been disparaged with actions taken by liberal activists to commit them to the dustbin of history.

Yet this attitude by Democratic liberals is nothing but absolute hypocrisy in their obvious objection to the bill, known as "The Ultimate Cancel Act" (SB 1248), introduced by Ingoglia.

His legislation seeks to "cancel" Florida's Democratic Party – cleverly worded to "immediately cancel" the filings of any political party that had "previously advocated for, or been in support of, slavery or involuntary solitude." For those who know their history, the Democratic Party fits this bill.

While any such canceled political party could re-register in the state, it would have to change its name to something "substantially different from the name of any other party previously registered."

In a press release, Ingoglia noted that Democrats and "leftist activists" have been attempting "to 'cancel' people and companies for things they have said or done in the past" and that by "using this standard, it would be hypocritical not to cancel the Democrat Party itself for the same reason.

"Some people want to have 'uncomfortable conversations' about certain subjects. Let's have those conversations."

While Democrats claim the bill is simply a "publicity stunt," they refuse to have any meaningful discussion about their party's ugly history of supporting slavery, giving rise to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), fighting Republican candidates for office who were black, passing Jim Crow laws, etc. In fact, the first 23 blacks elected to Congress were all Republicans.

Democrats' tacit support for racism was even evidenced in 2005 as President Bill Clinton gave a moving eulogy for Sen. William Proxmire, D-Wis., who went to his grave as a deplorable racist.

In 1956, Proxmire was one of 99 Democrats to sign the "Southern Manifesto" opposing the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to overturn Brown v. Board of Education, which held that separate but equal education for blacks was unconstitutional. The Manifesto basically underscored Democrats' commitment to support segregation forever.

Seven years later, Sen. Proxmire had not mellowed as he went on to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964, participating in the longest filibuster in history.

And, when it has been convenient to twist the truth about the Democratic Party's racism, members have not hesitated to do so – as did presidential candidate Al Gore in 2000 when he falsely told his NAACP audience the reason his father lost reelection was his support of that same civil rights bill.

Additionally, a much higher percentage of Republican senators voted for the bill than did Democrats.

Democrats in the 21st century have done an amazing job of whitewashing their anti-black history while erroneously accusing Republicans of that sin. This is despite the fact as recently as 2010, the Senate's president pro tempore was another racist and former KKK Exalted Cyclops, Robert Byrd, D-W.Va.

In a final blow to Democratic hypocrisy, Ingoglia tweeted , "Florida Dems should be thankful I'm not asking them to return all the money they've raised previously from their Jefferson/Jackson Dinners" – their annual fundraisers named after Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson.

Despite being anti-slavery, Jefferson is said to have enslaved over 600 people while Jackson bears responsibility for the tragic "Trail of Tears" which removed Indians from their native lands.

It would be fascinating to witness a debate between the Democratic Party's Florida leadership and Ingoglia bill supporters to see how Democrats explain away their toxic human rights history in attempting to oppose the legislation. However, we will never see that happen as they will take a head-in-the-sand approach to their past sins.

Perhaps these Democrat liberal activists should heed the biblical challenge given to those preparing to stone to death a woman accused of adultery when Jesus said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Like our history, no human life can claim perfection.

It is doubtful the liberal activists undermining our country's history today are of pure heart in doing so nor do their naive actions do anything to make America a more perfect nation by senselessly erasing our past historical errors.

After all, only by studying our errors of the past can we learn not to repeat them in the future.

James Zumwalt: China’s Doomsday Plan For America

Tue, 14 Mar 2023 21:19:59 GMT

CHINA'S DOOMSDAY PLAN FOR AMERICA

James G. Zumwalt / March 14, 2023

NOTE : While the article about China that follows is lengthy, its importance was underscored to me by the fact an earlier effort to transmit it resulted in my IP address being hacked by a source in that country.

I therefore believe it is a critical read for those seeking to understand where our relationship with China is headed.

It is important to understand because China set the course for this relationship twenty years ago--the result of a secret meeting in 2003. The purpose of that meeting, in which a speech was given by the retiring defense minister, was to detail how exactly Beijing could permanently eliminate America as a world power in the 21st century.

That speech laid out a frightening strategy which, ever since, Beijing has faithfully followed as we have naively been contributing to its success by helping China to become an economic powerhouse.

This article analyzes the key points of that speech and how the most recent incident involving a Chinese "weather" balloon transiting the US may well tie in to the overall accomplishment of this anti-US strategy.

I would encourage you to read this article before stepping into the voting booth in 2024.

* * * * *

AND Magazine ... A Chinese “weather balloon” paid the ultimate price of destruction after violating U.S. airspace, transiting across America, and meeting its demise over U.S. territorial waters six miles off the South Carolina coast at the hands of an F-22 pilot firing an air-to-air missile on February 4, 2023.

As additional balloons launched by China around the globe and over the U.S. are being detected and destroyed, a U.S. national security threat assessment is in order. Ironically, however, based on the contents of a 2003 speech delivered at a secret meeting in China, such an assessment could well have been done long before the first balloon was ever launched.

Discussion on the contents of that speech is particularly important as China now demands an apology from the U.S.

U.S. Navy divers managed to recover remnants of the downed balloon which were then sent to the FBI for examination. That examination has revealed, contrary to Beijing’s claim, it was not a weather balloon that had simply veered off course.

Instead, the balloon was equipped with several antennas and solar panels suggesting the presence of multiple intelligence collection systems, such as high-resolution photography and audio collection of both encrypted and public signals.

nterestingly, the balloon’s supposed “errant” path took it over several sensitive U.S. military sites. And, as it turns out, that balloon is apparently part of a much larger Chinese spying system conducting surveillance in forty countries.

The aforementioned 2003 speech was delivered by a senior Chinese military official who boasted about what fate was awaiting 21st-century America.

The speech was delivered by China’s then-defense minister, General Chi Haotian, who served in that position from 1992-2003. Chi laid bare the fate Beijing was planning for America – a fate so diabolical that Hollywood science fiction screenwriters would be hard-pressed to conceive of a similar scenario.

Before getting into details, it is important to remember that Chi was the operational commander who smashed the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests as the Chinese people briefly flirted with freedom. While Chi would later claim there were no casualties caused by his blitzkrieg-like effort to put the protests down, videos of the event strongly suggested otherwise.

In fact, the U.K. believes at least 10,000 Chinese citizens lost their lives as the military ruthlessly restored order.

Chi’s speech was long and, at times, meandering. However, every point he raised sought to rationalize an agenda justifying China’s implementation of a diabolical doomsday plan designed to seal America’s 21st-century fate.

While the specifics of that plan were shared towards the end of Chi’s remarks, it is important to understand China’s justification for it based on the numerous points he raised.

In addressing high-level Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials, Chi set forth his case.

(1) The Willingness of the Chinese People to Kill Innocents in War Time.

To his audience, it must have seemed somewhat strange to raise this point at the outset of his speech but, as previously mentioned, it made more sense when Chi tied it into the plan he detailed at the end of his remarks. It was an intriguing observation to make, made proudly, about the willingness of the Chinese people to kill those whom international law protects in times of war.

Chi was clearly a man both feared and revered for his brutal Tiananmen Square reputation. But, perhaps in that respect, it provided his audience with a sense of where he might be going with his comments.

Chi expressed his excitement over a “large-scale online survey,” the results of which were recently received and, to him, were most promising. He reported that the survey revealed that the young people of China were overwhelmingly committed to continuing support for the CCP.

But to determine this, it was important to know their attitude toward a future war. Thus, they were asked: “Will you shoot at women, children, and prisoners of war?” Chi indicated the ensuing 80% affirmative response rate exceeded CCP expectations.

But, Chi explained, what the CCP leadership was really interested in assessing indirectly was this: If China’s global development hinged on the massive killing of those who are most vulnerable in wartime, would the Chinese people support the effort?

(2) Moving from “Peace and Development” to “Modernization under the Saber” to Include Seizing Territory Outside of China.

Chi then addressed China’s next phase on the world stage.

Whereas for the previous 20 years, the theme of “peace and development” for China had been touted, it was now time for Beijing to pursue the only option left – ”modernization under the saber.”

Chi explained that Chinese leaders have long understood that “development is our top priority.” But many comrades only understood this in a very narrow sense, “assuming it to be limited to domestic development. The fact is, our ‘development’ refers to the great revitalization of the Chinese nation, which, of course, is not limited to the land we have now but also includes the whole world.”

Chi added that these leaders have “repeatedly stressed the theory regarding the shift of the center of World Civilization. Our slogan of ‘revitalizing China’ has this way of thinking as its basis.” This “historical vision is a treasure our Party should cherish.” To understand this better, Chi addressed the topic of evolution.

(3) The West’s Theory of Human Evolution from a Single Mother Conflicts with China’s Theory of Independent Evolution which Allows China to Claim “Racial Superiority.”

Chi then provided a “West versus China” history lesson on evolution.

Western scholars claim humanity as a whole originated from a single mother in Africa so that no one race can claim racial superiority, he lectured. But Chinese scholars disagree with this.

Chi said, “We did not originate in Africa. Instead, we originated independently in the land of China.” Thus, “the Chinese are different from other races on earth. While it was once thought, “Chinese civilization has had a history of five thousand years,” this is now refuted as it can be proven that “China’s rice-growing agricultural history alone can be traced back as far as 8,000 to 10,000 years.”

He added, “We can assert that we are the product of cultural roots of more than a million years…During our long history, our people have disseminated throughout the Americas…(and) became Indians in the Americas.”

He credited China for this due to its “national superiority” and being “at the peak of the world” during the Tang Dynasty (618-907 AD). “We were the center of the world civilization and no other civilization in the world was comparable to ours.”

But Chi then lamented how China lost direction due to “our complacency, narrow-mindedness, and the self-enclosure of our own country, we were surpassed by Western civilization and the center of the world shifted to the West.”

(4) 21st Century China is Positioned to Shift the Center of World Civilization Back to China.

Rehashing history, Chi explained that while the 19th century may be referred to “as the British century and the 20th century as the American century, then the 21st century will be the Chinese century.” As such, the CCP is “to greet the advent of the Chinese Century” by establishing “national revitalization’ as our great objective.”

(5) China Needs to Heed the Lessons of History Concerning “the Collapse of Communism in the Former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe as well as the Defeats of Germany and Japan in the Past.”

Chi explained, while recognizing the advantage of surprise in warfare, Japan made egregious mistakes in not hitting vital U.S. targets and not keeping America neutral. He said, “history did not arrange them to be ‘lords of the earth’ (a phrase Germany’s Adolf Hitler often used in his book Mein Kampf), for they are, after all, not the most superior race.”

He suggested, had Japan only awaited the technological development of nuclear weapons, it could have launched a successful surprise attack against the U.S. and Soviet Union.

Chi praised Germany for its efforts to educate its people, especially the younger generation, by means of propaganda and educational institutions spouting the government’s line. (This undoubtedly explains China’s effort to infiltrate many of America’s colleges.)

The Nazi Party aimed at “instilling into people’s minds, from elementary schools to colleges, the idea that German people are superior and convincing people that the historical mission of the Aryan people is to become the ‘lords of the earth’ whose right it is to ‘rule over the world.’”

Chi boiled down the three fundamental causes for the Axis powers’ defeat. These lessons have been heeded in China’s doomsday plan for America:

“First, they had too many enemies all at once, as they did not adhere to the principle of eliminating enemies one at a time; second, they were too impetuous, lacking the patience and perseverance required for great accomplishments; third, when the time came for them to be ruthless, they turned out to be too soft, therefore leaving troubles that resurfaced later on.”

Chi noted that:

“Today’s China is alarmingly similar to Germany back then. Both of them regard themselves as the most superior races; both of them have a history of being exploited by foreign powers and are therefore vindictive; both of them have the tradition of worshiping their own authorities; both of them feel that they have seriously insufficient living space...

...both of them raise high the two banners of nationalism and socialism and label themselves as ‘national socialism;’ both of them worship ‘one state, one party, one leader, and one doctrine.’”

Just as quick as Chi was to make the comparison to Nazi Germany, he dings it by claiming the latter was “too trivial to be compared” due to China’s much larger population, vast territory, its historic achievement of eliminating eight million nationalist troops in just three years, and the fact China still exists while Nazi Germany has been relegated to the dustbin of history.

Chi further rationalized:

“Our theory of the shifting center of civilization is of course more profound than Hitler’s theory of ‘the lords of the earth.’ Our civilization is profound and broad, which has determined that we are so much wiser than they were.”

(6) America’s Strength Over Adversity is Due to It Never Having to Fight on Its Own Territory.

Chi raised a point that the doomsday plan would address – why the U.S. today, despite its past wars, still remains formidable:

“It has never seen war on its mainland. Once its enemies aim at the mainland, these enemies would reach Washington before its congress finishes debating and authorizes the president to declare war. But for us, we don’t waste time on these trivial things.

Comrade Deng Xiaoping once said, ‘The Party’s leadership is prompt in making decisions.’ Once a decision is made, it is immediately implemented. There’s no wasting time on trivial things like in capitalist countries. This is our advantage! Our Party’s democratic centralism is built on the tradition of great unity...

...Although fascist Germany also stressed high-level centralism, they only focused on the power of the top leader but ignored the collective leadership of the central group. That’s why Hitler was betrayed by many later in his life, which fundamentally depleted the Nazis of their war capacity.”

(7) China’s Great Strength Lies in Its Atheism.

Further praising China for its greatness lacked by other historically aggressive countries, Chi stated:

“Our Chinese people are wiser than the Germans because, fundamentally, our race is superior to theirs. As a result, we have a longer history, more people, and a larger land area. On this basis, our ancestors left us with the two most essential heritages, which are atheism and great unity. It was Confucius, the founder of our Chinese culture, who gave us these heritages.

“This heritage determined that we have a stronger ability to survive than the West. That is why the Chinese race has been able to prosper for so long. We are destined ‘not to be buried by either heaven or earth’ no matter how severe the natural, man-made, and national disasters. This is our advantage.”

Chi argues that success turns on atheism being fully embraced which was Hitler’s failing...

“What makes us different from Germany is that we are complete atheists, while Germany was primarily a Catholic and Protestant country. Hitler was only half atheist.

Although Hitler also believed that ordinary citizens had low intelligence, and that leaders should therefore make decisions, and although German people worshiped Hitler back then, Germany did not have the tradition of worshiping sages on a broad basis. Our Chinese society has always worshiped sages, and that is because we don’t worship any God.

Once you worship a god, you can’t worship a person at the same time, unless you recognize the person as the god’s representative as they do in Middle Eastern countries. On the other hand, once you recognize a person as a sage, of course you will want him to be your leader…. This is the foundation of our democratic centralism.”

Chi offered one final criticism of why believing in God undermines CCP rule...

“Maybe you now understand why we recently decided to further promulgate atheism.If we let theology from the West into China and empty us from the inside, if we let all Chinese people listen to God and follow God, who will obediently listen to us and follow us?

If the common people don’t believe Comrade Hu Jintao (who, as Chi spoke, was then the CCP’s General Secretary) is a qualified leader, question his authority, and want to monitor him, if the religious followers in our society question why we are leaving God in churches, can our Party continue to rule China?”

(8) Setting the Stage: Either China Challenges America in the 21st Century or No One Does.

Having hit the above points, Chi summed it up for his audience in a single sentence: “The bottom line is, only China is a reliable force in resisting the Western parliament-based democratic system.

(9) Three Lessons Germany Ignored on How to Become “Lord of the Earth” that are important for China to Remember as It completes Its Historic Mission and Revitalizes Its Race.

Chi suggested there were three lessons Germany failed to grasp that doomed its mission to become the “lord of the earth” but which China, by remembering these lessons, will be successful.

These include firmly grasping the country’s living space, the Party’s control over the nation and the general direction toward becoming the “lord of the earth.” He then addressed each of these individually.

LESSON 1: Living Space.

Concerning living space, Chi noted it is “the biggest focus of the revitalization of the Chinese race” and “the source of the vast majority of wars in history.” It is here that he set the premise for China’s need for more living space.

Because China has limited per capita resources, because its 20th century ending economic development had a negative impact, because climates are rapidly changing for the worse, because China’s environment is severely polluted, “not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely threatened to a degree much greater than faced by Germany back then.”

Chi said a study showed that should China follow along the lines of the American style of consumption, its limited resources could not long support a population of 1.3 billion. This was causing China to become reliant upon imports.

Chi declared China has to explore the issue of acquiring more living space outside its borders while limiting open discussion on the matter and while avoiding any reference to it as “living space,” or “lebensraum,” as Nazi Germany called it, out of concerns China might then be labeled a 21st-century threat.

He suggested Western countries do not face the same problem as China does in this regard for the following reason...

...“From the perspective of history, the reason that China is faced with the issue of living space is because Western countries established colonies ahead of Eastern countries. Western countries established colonies all around the world, therefore giving themselves an advantage on the issue of living space.

...To solve this problem, we must lead the Chinese people outside of China, so that they could develop outside of China.”

LESSON 2: Fortifying CCP Leadership.

Chi next tackled the second lesson–focusing on fortifying the leadership capacity of the ruling party. He explained that this was what Comrade Mao Zedong did immediately upon China’s conquest, developing the CCP and strengthening its leadership position and “stressing that our Party is the pioneer of the Chinese race, in addition to being the pioneer of the proletariat.

Many citizens say in private, ‘We never voted for you, the Communist Party, to represent us. How can you claim to be our representatives?’”

There is no need for concern about this, Chi explained, because as long as the leadership can “lead the Chinese people outside of China, resolving the lack of living space in China,” it will have the support of the Chinese people...

...Thus, “Whether we can forever represent the Chinese people depends on whether we can succeed in leading the Chinese people out of China.” This then is “the most important determinant of the CCP’s leadership position.”

Starting to plant the seed for the doomsday plan, Chi declared, “we realized vaguely that as long as China’s economy is developed, people would support and love the Communist Party. Thus, we had to use several decades of peace to develop China’s economy…

...But at that time, we did not have mature ideas about how China would deal with international disputes after its economy becomes developed…the main themes in the world were peace and development. But the June 4 riot (Tiananmen Square protests) gave our Party a warning and gave us a lesson that is still fresh.”

The warning China received from the protests of its “peace and development” phase was that it was not an end-all solution. After all, “western oppositional forces always change the world according to their own visions; they want to change China and use peaceful evolution to overturn the leadership of our Communist Party...

...therefore, if we only develop the economy, we still face the possibility of losing control.” The Tiananmen Square protests almost brought about a transition that would have marked the CCP’s end.

This was when the CCP’s leadership began to focus on how best to maintain its control:

“After some deep pondering, we finally come to this conclusion: Only by turning our developed national strength into the force of a first striking outward – only by leading people to go out – can we win forever the Chinese people’s support and love for the Communist Party. Our party will then stand on invincible ground, and the Chinese people will have to depend on the Communist Party...

...They will forever follow the Communist Party with their hearts and minds, as was written in a couplet frequently seen in the countryside some years ago: ‘Listen to Chairman Mao, follow the Communist Party!’ Therefore, the June 4 riot made us realize that we must combine economic development with preparation for war and lead the people to go out!...

...Therefore, since then, our national defense policy has taken a 180-degree turn and we have since emphasized more and more ‘combining peace and war.’ Our economic development is all about preparing for the needs of war! Publicly we still emphasize economic development as our center, but in reality, economic development has war as its center!...

...We have made a tremendous effort to construct ‘The Great Wall Project’ to build up, along our coastal and land frontiers as well as around large and medium-sized cities, a solid underground ‘Great Wall’ that can withstand a nuclear war. We are also storing all necessary war materials...

...Therefore, we will not hesitate to fight a Third World War, so as to lead the people to go out and to ensure the Party’s leadership position. In any event, we, the CCP, will never step down from the stage of history! We’d rather have the whole world, or even the entire globe, share life and death with us than step down from the stage of history!...

...Isn’t there a ‘nuclear bondage’ theory? It means that since nuclear weapons have bound the security of the entire world, all will die together if death is inevitable. In my view, there is another kind of bondage, and that is, the fate of our Party is tied up with that of the whole world. If we, the CCP, are finished, China will be finished, and the world will be finished.”

Not wishing to see the world and China perish in a nuclear global exchange, Chi reported another option existed.

He said China would open its doors to overseas markets, “the profit-seeking western capitalists will invest capital and technology in China to assist our development so that they can occupy the biggest market in the world…

...Our numerous overseas Chinese help us create a favorable environment for the introduction of foreign capital, foreign technology, and advanced experience into China. This guarantees our reform and open-door policy will achieve tremendous success....

...China’s great economic expansion will inevitably lead to the shrinkage of per-capita living space for the Chinese people, and this will encourage China to turn outward in search of new living space…China’s great economic expansion will inevitably come with significant development in our military forces, creating conditions for our expansion overseas...

Ever since Napoleon’s time, the West has been alert for the possible awakening of the sleeping lion that is China. Now, the sleeping lion is standing up and advancing into the world, and has become unstoppable!”

LESSON 3: The “Issue of America”

Chi asserted that a Party Central Committee report noted:

“The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict with the Western strategic interest and therefore will inevitably be obstructed by the Western countries doing everything they can. So, only by breaking the blockade formed by the Western countries headed by the United States can China grow and move toward the World!”

If the U.S. is firm in blocking China, Chi rationalized, it will be difficult for Beijing to do anything significant concerning Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or Japan. However, even if China were to make such territorial acquisitions, they would provide “very trivial” living space to meet China’s needs.

Chi added that only territorial acquisitions such as the U.S., Canada, and Australia “have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.” This makes solving the “issue of America” key to solving all other issues.

Chi proffered a justification for China’s colonizing the U.S...

...“America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the white race. We, the descendants of the Chinese nation, are entitled to the possession of the land! It is said that the residents of the yellow race have a very low social status in the United States. We need to liberate them...

...After solving the ‘issue of America,’ the Western countries of Europe would bow to us, not to mention Taiwan, Japan, and other small countries. Therefore, solving the ‘issue of America’ is the mission assigned to the CCP members by history…It is historical destiny that China and the United States will come to unavoidable confrontation on a narrow path and fight each other!...

...The United States, unlike Russia and Japan, has never occupied and hurt China, and also assisted in its battle against the Japanese. But, it will certainly be an obstruction and the biggest obstruction! In the long run, the relationship of China and the United States is one of a life and death struggle.”...

...While we recognize America’s obstructionist role will be a factor in this century, we also recognizes now “is not the time to openly break up with them yet. Our reform and opening to the outside World still rely on their capital and technology. We need America.

...Therefore, we must do everything we can to promote our relationship with America, learn from America in all aspects, and use America as an example to reconstruct our country.”

Accordingly, in conducting its foreign affairs with America, Chi said it is important to put on “a smiling face in order to please them…The United States is the most successful country in the World today. Only after we have learned all of its useful experiences can we replace it in the future...

...Even though we are presently imitating the American tone ‘China and the United States rely on each other’…we must not forget that the history of our civilization repeatedly has taught us that one mountain does not allow two tigers to live together.”

Chi emphasized that to be successful in playing the US like a fiddle in naively helping China achieve its ultimate prosperity requires it must “Refrain from revealing ambitions and put others off the track. The hidden message is: we must put up with America; we must conceal our ultimate goals, hide our capabilities, and await the opportunity.”

China will beat its drum concerning the Taiwan issue but will never openly acknowledge the “American issue” in accordance with the principle of “doing one thing under the cover of another.”

(10) China’s Doomsday Plan for the Demise of the American People.

It is at this point that Chi finally addresses the deadly fate China has planned for America:

“To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even rifles or machine guns...

...Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the (conquered) people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people (Chinese) migrate there...

...Only by using special means to ‘clean up’ America will be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not.. .

...What kind of special means is there available for us to ‘clean up America?’”

Chi explained that neither conventional nor nuclear weapons will achieve such an end – the latter undoubtedly resulting in the U.S. causing as much destruction in China as China would cause in the U.S. He added...

...“Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves...

...There has been rapid development of modern biological technology and new bioweapons have been invented one after another. Of course, we have not been idle. In the past years, we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of ‘cleaning up’ America all of a sudden.”

He credited Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, who died in 1997, with foregoing funding to develop “aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.”

Chi offered a momentary humanitarian thought, suggesting the U.S. first be given a warning to surrender land to the Chinese people “because America was first discovered by the Chinese,” but doubted it would accomplish the mission.

No, China must “use decisive means to ‘clean up’ America and reserve America for our use in a moment (obviously suggesting the element of surprise in its use). Our historical experience has proven that as long as we make it happen, nobody in the World can do anything about us. Furthermore, if the United States as the leader is gone, then other enemies have to surrender to us.”

Chi acknowledged that “Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place.”

He cited the author of “Yellow Peril” in claiming more than half of China’s population would die and that “This yellow land has reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who knows how soon it will come, the great collapse will occur any time and more than half the population will have to go.”

In declaring that China must prepare itself for two scenarios, Chi expressed the callous opinion that the preservation of the Party takes priority over millions of lives being lost, even if some of those lives lost are Chinese.

“If our biological weapons succeed in the surprise attack, the Chinese people will be able to keep their losses at a minimum in the fight against the United States. If, however, the attack fails and triggers a nuclear retaliation from the United States, China would perhaps suffer a catastrophe in which more than half of its population would perish…

...Whatever the case may be, we can only move forward fearlessly, for the sake of our Party and State and our nation’s future, regardless of the hardships we have to face and the sacrifices we have to make. The population, even if more than half dies, can be reproduced. But if the Party fails, everything is gone, and forever gone.”

Noting the ruthlessness of this plan to deal with the “issue of America,” Chi still justified it by saying “good guys never win.”

“In Chinese history, in the replacement of dynasties, the ruthless have always won and the benevolent have always failed…We must emphasize the importance of adopting resolute measures. In the future, the two rivals, China and the United States will eventually meet each other in a narrow road, and our leniency to the Americans will mean cruelty toward the Chinese people.”

Accepting the brutality of killing millions of Americans, Chi lectured...

“But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century in which the CCP leads the World. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths. But if history confronts us with a choice between the deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we’d have to pick the latter as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people and the life of our Party...

...That is because, after all, we are Chinese and members of the CCP. Since the day we joined the CCP, the Party, life has always been above all else. History will prove that we made the right choice.”

Almost as an afterthought, Chi explained that Chinese ruthlessness must have no limits, even when it comes to the millions of Chinese living in the United States who would perish as well...:

...“These comrades are too pedantic; they are not pragmatic enough. If we had insisted on the principle that the Chinese should not kill other Chinese, would we have liberated China?...

...As for the several million Chinese living in the United States, this is of course a big issue. Therefore, in recent years, we have been conducting research on genetic weapons, this is, those weapons that do not kill yellow people. But producing a result with this kind of research is extremely difficult...

...Of the research done on genetic weapons throughout the World, Israel is the most advanced. Their genetic weapons are designed to target Arabs and protect the Israelis. But even they have not reached the stage of actual deployment...

...We have cooperated with Israel on some research. Perhaps we can introduce some of the technologies used to protect Israelis and remold these technologies to protect the yellow people. But their technologies are not mature yet, and it is difficult for us to surpass them in a few years...

...If it has to be five or ten years before some breakthrough can be achieved in genetic weapons, we cannot afford to wait any longer. Old comrades like us cannot afford to wait that long for we don’t have that much time to live.”

...While voicing his discouragement that such technology will advance in the years he has left, Chi continued to downplay the loss of those Chinese living in the U.S...

...“The majority of those Chinese living in the United States have become our burden, because they have been corrupted by the bourgeois liberal values for a long time and it would be difficult for them to accept our Party’s leadership. If they survived the war, we would have to launch campaigns in the future to deal with them, to reform them…

...History has proved that any social turmoil is likely to involve many deaths.”

Thus, Chi promoted the argument that Chinese living in the U.S. would have to be considered a casualty of China’s war to cleanse America of its population.

Ironically, Chi, at age 93, is still alive and kicking today. The question, however, is whether the technology has advanced to the stage yet where genetic-specific biological weapons exist.

(11) Connecting Opening and Closing Remarks.

With China’s doomsday plan concerning America’s 21st-century fate now explained, Chi referred back to his opening remarks about the willingness of the country’s young generation today to do whatever is necessary to achieve the goal of national revitalization:...

...“You probably understand why we wanted to know whether the (Chinese) people would rise against us (the CCP) if one day we secretly adopt resolute means to ‘clean up’ America. For over twenty years, China has been enjoying peace, and a whole generation has not been tested by war…

...The ideology of the West has come to dominate the World as a whole and the Western theory of human nature and Western view of human rights have increasingly been disseminated among the young people in China. Therefore, we were not very sure about the people’s attitude...

...If our people are fundamentally opposed to ‘cleaning up’ America, we will, of course, have to adopt corresponding measures…What turned out to be very comforting…(was the 80% support for the CCP)...This is excellent fruition of our Party’s work in propaganda and education over the past few decades....

...Of course, a few people under Western influence have objected to shooting at prisoners of war and women and children…Some others said, ‘The Chinese love to label themselves as a peace-loving people, but actually, they are the most ruthless people. The comments are resonant of killing and murdering, sending chills to my heart.’...

...Although there are not too many people holding this kind of viewpoint and they will not affect the overall situation in any significant way, we still need to strengthen the propaganda to respond to this kind of argument.”

CONCLUSION

Some of the points made by Chi in his speech give us ample pause for reflection. For example, is the emergence of COVID-19 tied in any way to China’s doomsday plan to exterminate Americans? Could it have been a trial balloon?

Chi’s reference to the quiet use of a biological weapon to eradicate the American population is obviously very disturbing.

The fact that this kind of technology was of keen interest to China as early as 2003 and it has had the benefit of the intervening years to advance to new capability levels puts the spotlight, as COVID-19 raised its ugly head, on early expert opinions rendered concerning its source of origin.

Among these experts was Dr. Anthony Fauci who, as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, played a key role in diagnosing and treating COVID-19.

As the recognized “duty expert” on such issues, Fauci’s initial claim, supported by the World Health Organization (WHO), was that the disease most likely emanated from a natural occurrence , leaping from animals to humans through an emissary animal. The theory promoted was that an infected bat, sold at a Chinese wet market and then consumed by a buyer, was a possible catalyst.

However, over time, other opinions emerged, pointing the finger at a research lab in Wuhan, China, known to have a faulty safety record and where gain-of-function research on bats was being conducted. Undermining Fauci’s credibility was the fact he had even helped fund the Wuhan lab’s research, although he failed to acknowledge this while giving congressional testimony.

The latter sourcing theory lends credence to Chi’s claim biological weapons research was being explored by the Chinese government with research perhaps already underway at labs such as Wuhan at the time of his speech in 2003.

If so, it also raises the question of whether the release was accidental or intentional – the latter to test its effectiveness as a biological targeting weapon. As COVID-19 has not proven to be genetic-specific in attacking victims, we know the ultimate biological weapon Chi described most likely does not yet exist, thus suggesting the release may have been accidental.

This is further evidenced by the fact that not even China was spared from COVID-19’s spread and ultimate devastation.

But that does not mean China has stopped researching how to develop a biological genetic-specific weapon. In fact, with millions of Americans submitting DNA to private laboratories to learn more about their ancestors, China has been involved in purchasing much of the data for its research. Thus, the development of such a weapon may well be just around the corner.

Also in need of reflection is that a genetic-specific biological weapon is not the only way China can succeed in its mission to quickly kill hundreds of millions of Americans.

Ever since the development of nuclear weapons, we have known about the destructive capability created by a high-altitude detonation. While few victims would be killed outright by the initial blast, an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would be released, knocking out electrical grids in an affected area – the size of which would be determined by the blast’s altitude.

But, as the grids operate on massive generators, most of which are manufactured abroad, it could well take months, or even years, to get replacements in order to bring electrical grids back online. It is estimated 290 million American lives could be lost in the interim as supply chain interruptions took their toll on the population.

The Chinese balloon shot down on February 4 by the U.S. could possibly have carried a nuclear payload to create an EMP. Thus, such a balloon’s flight into U.S. airspace, based on what is known about China’s doomsday plan for America, should have created a major concern for our leaders.

For the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) not to have advised Biden to immediately shoot down the balloon suggests its members lacked familiarity with Chi’s speech and China’s sinister intentions. Had the JCS been knowledgeable about this, every effort should have been made to shoot it down first and ask questions later.

The content of Chi’s speech armed the U.S. with the right to destroy any such delivery system China might send into our airspace as Chi has forewarned us it has every intention of launching its attack by surprise. Accordingly, the balloon’s destruction should have occurred immediately upon its entry into U.S. airspace – not as it was preparing to exit, as was done.

It is critical that this 21st-century threat by China be fully understood by our leaders, lest we find ourselves victims of a much more devastating Pearl Harbor-like attack.

Undoubtedly Chi, in delivering his speech as he departed office as defense minister in 2003, had no expectation that what he said that day would later be revealed in the West. As he stated in those remarks, the success of China’s plan for America rested upon deceiving the West – effectively smiling while stabbing it in the back.

Yet, to date, no effort has been undertaken to impress upon the global community or even our own civilian and military leaders the dastardly threat China poses not just to the U.S. but to a future world order that would be dominated by Beijing alone.

Meanwhile, as China bides its time in developing a genetic-specific virus to put its doomsday plan into action, it is pressing forward on other fronts – at least one of which is effectively claiming lives on a daily basis.

In his speech, Chi failed to mention one negative history lesson about the West that has merit – one that heavily impacted China in the aftermath of its defeat by the British in the 19th century. The victors reaped fortunes by selling addictive opium to the Chinese.

So addictive was the drug that it literally caused Chinese society to collapse, suffering the humiliation for centuries of civil war, economic collapse, occupation, and loss of empire – all linked to the destruction of generations of Chinese leaders.

Perhaps sensing that turnaround is fair play, China now is instrumental in feeding fentanyl to Mexican drug gangs who are smuggling the deadly drug across the border into the U.S. As a result, we are witnessing a fentanyl plague responsible for killing between 75,000 to 100,000 Americans annually.

Biden’s open border policy effectively has become an opportunity both China and the Mexican drug cartels simply cannot refuse.

Another front upon which China is moving is the acquisition of land in the U.S. Historically, it has been one of the largest foreign buyers of residential real estate in the U.S. At $6.1 billion in housing purchases recently, it became the top foreign buyer. It has now turned its attention to farmland, increasing such farmland holdings outside of China by 1000%.

Within the U.S., China controls approximately 383,000 acres of farmland, having grown more than twenty-fold from $81 million in 2010 to nearly $1.9 billion in 2021.

Perplexed by China’s U.S. land purchases but recognizing it cannot be anything good, some lawmakers worry the purchases represent a national security threat. Undoubtedly, not by coincidence, several of these purchases are near U.S. military bases which have set off alarm bells.

Of note too is China’s long-time interest in spreading its influence as well as tapping into banks of scientific and technical data. As Chi noted in his speech, Nazi Germany was to be commended for using propaganda in its educational system to influence young minds to think as it did.

Recognizing some elite universities are breeding future generations of U.S. leaders, China contributes heavily to them. Harvard has benefitted from over $1 billion in donations from China. Schools like USC and Penn have also been major recipients of China’s foreign influencing campaign.

In 2021, China-based entities, including the government, entered into $120 million in contracts with over two dozen U.S. universities. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky) has alluded to the fact that China had worked with a U.S. university – funding for which was provided by the National Institutes of Health – to develop superviruses.

On yet another front, during the first four months of FY 2023 (October 2022-January 2023), U.S. Customs and Border Protection has reported a 719% increase in the number of illegal Chinese immigrants crossing our southwest border compared to the same time period last year.

Why the sudden increased influx of Chinese coming across the border? Is the Chinese government complicit in this effort?

Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT) described the balloon incident as a “poke in the eye” of the U.S. by China. While we can only guess at the motivation, perhaps President Xi Jinping saw it as a deserved eye poke for the face he lost when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca) visited Taiwan over Beijing’s objections.

While the transit across the entire U.S. of the Chinese balloon shot down on February 4 is disturbing enough, a recent revelation by former CIA operative Sam Faddis about the three other unidentified objects that were also shot down is even more disturbing.

Faddis claims that the “evaluation of the available data shows not just that these balloons were launched from China but also shows the time and date when they were launched.” He notes that China has long had an interest in developing such balloons and airships for surveillance work.

In 2015, they boasted about a “near space” airship they developed, capable of monitoring activities on the ground – one that had circumnavigated the globe, passing over the U.S. undetected.

He reports that all four of these aerial platforms were undoubtedly under the operational control of the Chinese Strategic Support Force (SSF)--a command tasked with strategic space, cyber, and electronic warfare missions.

The last three objects, which the Biden administration described as “benign,” were launched from a military facility in Mongolia. Faddis went on to explain...

“What the recent spate of balloon sightings exposes is that the Chinese are conducting extensive intelligence collection activities directed at our strategic missile and bomber bases.

"Given the tension between the United States and China generally and the current Chinese intense focus on Taiwan specifically, these collection activities ought to be highly concerning.

“We do not know that these actions are simply general strategic collection. They may be connected to impending Chinese actions or even to preemptive Chinese strikes on our forces.

“Acknowledging that would be inconvenient for an administration thoroughly coopted by the Chinese however. So, instead, they have opted to peddle the notion that nothing is happening and there is nothing about which to be concerned.

“It would be nice to see that ‘Intelligence Community’ assessment and the facts upon which it was based. It would be interesting to see the pictures of these ‘benign’ objects. It would be reassuring to know that there was any kind of factual basis for the spin emanating from the White House.”

The Benghazi Gambit, Sam Faddis

Faddis concludes no facts concerning the last three objects are likely to be released as the Biden administration will opt to play the “Benghazi gambit”- a reference to how the Obama administration covered up the real reason for the 2012 Islamic extremist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.

The above gives weight to the theory China is testing us to learn more about its enemy by gauging America’s reaction. If so, it is in keeping with the teachings of one of the world’s ancient military and political strategists who, ironically, was Chinese –Sun Tzu. He gave the following counsel 2500 years ago...

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

If Beijing’s numerous acts in violating U.S. airspace were trial balloons, flown to assess U.S. reaction to a doomsday initiative, China has heeded Sun Tzu’s sage advice.

On the other hand, based on a doomsday plan we now know exists, should we choose to ignore what Chi’s speech reveals, we then are ignoring Sun Tzu’s counsel by refusing to accept the reality of that which our Chinese adversary is either fully capable now or very soon will be fully capable.

While delivering a speech recently, Sen. Josh Hawley (R- Missouri) was interrupted by a female protester who shouted “China is not our enemy! The climate crisis is!” Such naivete among Americans is just what China counts on, removing it from public scrutiny as our major threat.

The best way we can lose a war is to not accept the fact that a war is quietly being waged against us. As Chi makes perfectly clear, China is fighting that war – one committed to our destruction.

With the destructive power of an EMP blast and the potential impact of an America-only man-made pandemic as potential options for a Chinese attack against the U.S., we need to heed both Sun Tzu’s wisdom and Chi’s warning. It mandates we treat anything bearing a “Made in China” label as suspect.

It also necessitates forewarning China that their now, ”not-so-secret” actions have left us with no choice, in the face of any further act of aggression they undertake, in triggering a “shoot first and ask questions later” U.S. response policy.

Sadly, this is the 21st-century state of affairs China has created.

Is Fetterman's staff playing 'Weekend at Bernie's'?

Sat, 11 Mar 2023 01:11:22 GMT

IS FETTERMAN'S STAFF PLAYING "WEEKEND AT BERNIE'S?"

James G. Zumwalt / March 10, 2023

World Net Daily ... The plot of the 1989 black comedy "Weekend at Bernie's" involves two company employees who were invited to their boss's vacation home for a weekend, only to find when they got there that he (Bernie) had been murdered. Nonetheless, they take Bernie's corpse with them wherever they go to give the appearance he is still alive, hoping to flush out the killer.

Reflecting on the situation of Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., one is reminded of this film by the recent antics of the senator's staff.

While Fetterman is still among the living, reports are that he has been physically and mentally sidelined by the impact of a pre-election (May 2022) stroke he suffered, combined with a diagnosis of severe depression – so much so that he remains hospitalized and is to receive inpatient care for "a few weeks." Added to his medical problems most recently is a diagnosis of shingles.

Yet, despite Fetterman's possible inability to function either physically or mentally to perform the responsibilities of the office to which he was elected, his staff – much like Bernie's two employees – have been giving Pennsylvania voters the appearance that Fetterman is an active, functioning member of the U.S. Senate.

It's amazing what an incapacitated Fetterman has been able to do, according to his office.

In the aftermath of the East Palestine, Ohio, train wreck and the environmental damage it wrought, Democrats' legislative efforts seek to introduce a new framework to enhance train safety. Fetterman's office reported their senator was joining this effort and would co-sign the legislation. This, despite the fact Fetterman purportedly is unable to comprehend much of anything at this time.

According to Matt Vespa in Townhall, Fetterman's doctor's notes, "some of which were drafted by campaign donors … were rendered worthless when reports trickled out that he blew a fuse during a party retreat" in February, resulting in his being rushed to a hospital.

The public has yet to see the senator's medical records, while his staff deflects inquiries about his ability to consider such legislation.

CNN reported that Fetterman's stay at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center may be as long as a month and that he is unable to even care for himself. In addition to the railway safety legislation, we are told Fetterman is cosponsoring five other bills.

Questions remain over whether Fetterman has suffered brain damage. The situation is serious enough that Republicans now are demanding the senator appear on camera to prove he is still "alive and well" or resign if he is unable to do so.

Perhaps prompted by this demand, his office did release a photo of Fetterman sitting in a chair in his hospital room, holding a paper he was supposedly reading. Of course, that photograph really fails to tell us anything about his physical or mental capacities as it could just as well have been staged.

There are apparently several other pieces of legislation Fetterman is said to be working on, but without being able to question him about those bills, we have no idea how much he really comprehends about them.

It's doubtful that someone hospitalized for severe depression is capable of performing the duties of a U.S. senator. Therefore, we may well have a situation in which unelected staff members from Fetterman's office are making decisions for him.

Although Fetterman's physician, Clifford Chen, examined him prior to the election and reported he was perfectly fine, the senator's chief of staff, Adam Jentleson, fears due to the stress of the campaign his boss may have suffered permanent brain damage.

Democrats were quick to jump all over Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., after he was elected on the basis of numerous fabrications about his background. While Santos has proven he did not need the benefit of political experience to be able to deceive voters, what he did by intentionally misrepresenting his credentials was unethical – for which he should be forced to resign.

However, what Democrats who worked closely with Fetterman both before and after his election did in misrepresenting that he was fit for office was also highly unethical. It tells us these Democrats cherished power more than acting in the best interests of the country.

As a result, there are those in Fetterman's office who are standing in his shoes to move the Democratic Party agenda forward under his name, while lacking any authority to do so.

Both in "Weekend at Bernie's" and in Fetterman's office, efforts were made by the main characters to be deceitful.

In the former case, it was funny – a product of Hollywood's outrageous creativity; in the latter, at a time Russia, China, Iran and North Korea threaten us and an alert U.S. leadership must be ready to act quickly, it is not.

If NFL coaches could replace our woke JCS

Fri, 10 Mar 2023 01:36:00 GMT

IF NFL COACHES COULD REPLACE OUR "WOKE" JCS

James G. Zumwalt / March 8, 2023

Stars & Stripes ... In Super Bowl LVII, most viewers saw what they wanted — a competitive football game between two explosive NFL teams decided in the last minute with a Kansas City Chiefs field goal defeating the Philadelphia Eagles 38-35.

Other viewers, those more attuned to social activism, noticed something else. At least four separate events surrounding the game and its festivities — three of which were most obvious — undoubtedly left activists cheering. Interestingly, the fourth should have troubled them for lacking diversity team representation but did not.

The first three included the following...

...(1) Our national anthem was immediately followed by a 19th-century hymn titled ”Lift Every Voice and Sing” — considered to be the Black national anthem. While activists embraced it as demonstrating equity for Blacks, critics opposed it for racial divisiveness. Having two national anthems is like serving two masters; it does little to bond us all together under one flag.

...(2) Also, as part of the NFL opening ceremonies, there was a flyover of four military combat aircraft — piloted by women — obviously another feather in the activists’ equity cap. While there is no doubt women are just as qualified to fly combat planes as their male counterparts, the all-female flyover distracted from the important gender bond shared on 21st century battlefields.

As both genders operate together for one mission — to defeat our enemies — the NFL flyover should have involved pilots of both genders to underscore this unity of purpose.

...(3) Activists undoubtedly were also enthusiastic over the left-leaning celebrities featured in many of the television ads. Apparently the NFL sought to keep its leftist image intact by avoiding conservative voices lest it incur the wrath of the woke.

Nonetheless, a Christian ad conveying a $20 million message of empathy by Jesus for all earned criticism from Rep. Alexandra Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., who claimed Jesus would not fund commercials to “make fascism look benign.”

But a fourth event went unnoticed by Super Bowl viewers. The majority of players on both teams were Black.

In fact, 70% of NFL players are Black. With Black males representing about 6.5% of the U.S. population, this means their representation on the gridiron is substantially greater than their representative portion of the general population.

Yet, in a so-called “woke” world, there is no concern that teams should reflect a more balanced representation of white players.

There is good reason for this. Coaches care nothing about a player’s race, as their focus is strictly upon individual player performance contributing to a winning team effort. And a reality of professional football is that many of the best performers are Black. The same is true in the NBA, where Blacks account for 71.8% of the players.

The ultimate goal in professional sports is winning, leaving coaches unconcerned about “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) — restrictions imposed by the Biden administration upon our Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) and down through the ranks.

The military — like NFL coaches — should be allowed to field only the best performers on 21st-century battlefields, regardless of race — an outcome made much less likely where DEI restrictions govern.

Interestingly, Bill Jacobson, founder of the Equal Protection Project, a group devoted to the fair treatment of all people without regard to race or ethnicity, nailed DEI for what it really is, saying it is just racism in another form.

Yet this is what our military is embracing.

As long as there is an NFL, individual performance will dictate who plays on a team and who does not. Our military should field its warriors on the same basis.

As Iran gains nuclear arms capability, eyes turn to Israel

Thu, 09 Mar 2023 01:35:20 GMT

AS IRAN GAINS NUCLEAR ARMS CAPABILITY, EYES TURN TO ISRAEL

James G. Zumwalt / March 8, 2023

World Net Daily ... As aggressive as a non-nuclear Iran has been under the leadership of its mullahs, imagine how much more aggressive an Iran with a nuclear arms capability would be. By mid-March, we will not have to imagine such a scenario for it becomes a reality.

Experts tell us this rogue state will be capable of producing materials needed to make a nuclear bomb by then. We are informed now the only way to contain the country's nuclear program is by getting Tehran to accept a new Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – the first JCPOA having been negotiated in 2015 by President Barack Obama.

There will be those who immediately accept the premise a new JCPOA is needed quickly and that the reason Iran has reached this threshold is because President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the deal in 2018, largely due to pro-Tehran one-sidedness and JCPOA violations. However, blaming Trump ignores four truths...

...(1) Obama lied to us when he gave assurances that, under JCPOA, Iran would never have nuclear weapons. Even if the mullahs complied with it, the agreement left the door open for Tehran to start developing nukes as early as 2025.

...(2) It is difficult to name a single international agreement with which the mullahs have fully complied .

...(3) It is irrational to believe a country's leadership – responsible for the 1988 massacre of 30,000 political prisoners and currently arresting thousands of its peacefully protesting citizens who have reached the limit of their willingness to endure a brutal government's rule – will ever feel "contained" by any international deal to which it may agree.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said , in addition to other actions by Iran, by virtue of the mullahs "viciously cracking down on peaceful protesters at home," Tehran must "never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon."

...(4) Obama never required the mullahs to sign the JCPOA. Therefore, his administration acknowledged in 2015 that, since the agreement was not an executive order or a treaty, it was not "legally binding."

In order to avoid the mandatory two-thirds U.S. Senate approval required for an international treaty, Obama chose not to call it as such as he knew he could not, and did not, win a super-majority based on secret side deals benefiting Iran and deceiving Congress.

We need to remember this is the same Iranian leadership that assured us years ago that developing weapons of mass destruction was against the principles of Islam – and then quietly undertook an initiative to do so. Later, when challenged by the West for undertaking a nuclear program, the mullahs assured us they were not, only to have evidence revealing such a program was underway.

Then the mullahs assured us their program was only for peaceful purposes, which we discovered was yet another lie . And most recently, while 90% uranium enrichment is required for nuclear weapons, the mullahs tell the world they are only at 60% when their real enrichment level is 84%.

Based on such a deceitful history, why would any rational member of the global community accept what the mullahs tell us? The mullahs have clearly used negotiated agreements only to further their own goals in advancing to a more advantageous position.

We also need to remember ever since the mullahs came to power in 1979, they have openly denied Israel's right to exist and called for that country's eradication.

If one goes back to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's statement – vocalized at a time Tehran's secret nuclear program was underway – it is clear the objectives of Islam in establishing world domination over all other religions along with Israel's destruction takes precedence over any fears of retaliation for Iran's acts of aggression, regardless of what those actions involved.

Khomeini brazenly embraced the primacy of Islam's interests over national interests saying , "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let Iran go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."

Undoubtedly, Iran's advancement toward having a nuclear weapons arsenal is most disturbing for Israel. There were two previous times Muslim countries attempted to develop a nuclear capability, only to have Israel derail their efforts before either could become a serious threat.

In 1981, Israel destroyed an uncompleted nuclear reactor in Iraq; in 2007, it did the same thing in Syria – a reactor probably being built on behalf of the Iranians. Both raids on these reactors was the result of the "Begin Doctrine " – named after Israel's prime minister from 1977-1983, Menachem Begin, who ordered the Iraq attack – seeking to deny any Arab enemy of Israel a nuclear arms capability.

The doctrine sought to forewarn those committed to Israel's destruction, such as Iran, that Israel would launch a preventive strike to deny such states a nuclear arsenal.

Israel has allowed Iran to get much closer to its nuclear goal than it did with either Iraq or Syria. The question now remains whether Israel will continue the Begin Doctrine or accept the inherent risks of not doing so. Interestingly, last year, Saudi Arabia opened up its airspace to all flights going to or from Israel.

While these rights apply only to commercial flights, it would not be surprising to learn the two countries have held discussions about military overflights in case Israel decides to implement the Begin Doctrine against Iran.

While Israel's attacks on nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria were basically "one and done," it faces a much different situation in Iran.

Having learned the lessons of 1981 and 2007, the mullahs not only have spread out their nuclear facilities but have built several of them deep underground . Additionally, Israel will making its decision to act against Iran, or not, at a time its relations with the U.S. are not at their best.

This is due to President Joe Biden's efforts to curry favor with the Palestinians by reinstating funding, terminated by Trump, in the amount of $200 million – used by the Palestinian Authority to reward families whose terrorist members were killed practicing their profession against Israel.

A nuclear-armed Iran spells bad news for all, especially Israel. Its previous actions against Iraq and Syria suggest planning for a strike against Iran might well be in the works.

However, just like Iran's establishment of a terrorist base in Venezuela went unchallenged by the U.S., undermining a long ago abandoned Monroe Doctrine , the major challenge of destroying Iran's nuclear capability in one fell swoop may well cause Israel to abandon the Begin Doctrine.

AOC: The Queen of Misinformation strikes again

Sat, 04 Mar 2023 02:00:43 GMT

AOC: THE QUEEN OF MISINFORMATION STRIKES AGAIN

James G. Zumwalt / March 3, 2023

World Net Daily ... Maybe it's just me but the more I hear the Democratic representative from New York, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), rant, the more I wish her parents had been celibate. There seems to be nothing about American and Christian values she holds sacred – nor does she give much thought to actual facts in her various rants.

It would be interesting to know what it is that motivates voters in her district twice now to have voted for her to represent them as one is hard pressed to identify any positive accomplishments while the negatives about her continue mounting.

Let's look at how the "Queen of Misinformation" uses her magic wand in an effort to convert facts into fiction.

AOC used the occasion of a House Oversight Committee hearing concerning Twitter's censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop to go off on one of her unhinged rants. Rather than focusing on the topic at hand, she began attacking a Twitter account posted under the name of "Libs of TikTok."

This account has gained a tremendous following for exposing the most insane commenters on TikTok – most of whom are of the liberal persuasion, which was obviously an issue for AOC.

Originally operating anonymously, the account is now known to be the brainchild of a woman named Chaya Raichik. Perhaps more disturbing to AOC than Raichik's posting information critical about various outrageous leftist positions is that Raichik substantiates what she posts with real facts.

AOC went off on her rant, attacking "Libs of TikTok" for "falsely" exposing Boston Children's Hospital and its willingness to perform transgender surgeries on minors. She maligned the account, suggesting such claims, including the performance of hysterectomies on children, may well have led to a bomb threat made against it later.

But quick to set the record straight, Seth Dillon, who is the CEO of the Babylon Bee, posted , in a serious comment, "The great irony here is that @AOC is lying. Libs of TikTok has simply reported the facts about what these hospitals have said about their own services. It's all documented. But this is what they (the likes of AOC) do – they use misinformation to smear you as being a source of it."

Also criticizing AOC was Raichik who reminded the congresswoman what the definition of "defamation" is.

Her post was accompanied by the now infamous 2018 staged photo of AOC supposedly crying outside the fence of a migrant detention facility in Texas. Like the staged photo, AOC has always tried to play the emotion card, simulating same when useful for her to do so.

This resulted in her claiming that, as a result of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill protests, she suffered trauma – despite never being in danger nor even setting eyes on a protester since she was in a totally different building. Always in search of another way to take center stage, AOC used an ad appearing on television during the Feb. 12 Super Bowl game to do so again.

At a time of such social turmoil in America, a Christian group known as "He Gets Us" aired two religious-oriented Super Bowl advertisements. They conveyed the message that Jesus was someone with empathy for all, whether immigrants, the poor or those who are politically divided, followed by a video of social unrest and the words "Jesus loved the people we hate."

The ads also sought to spread a unifying message to the LGBTQ+ and other communities that have often felt unwelcomed by Christianity. One would think for the supposed political party of tolerance, all Dems would embrace the message. AOC did not.

While the ads, at $20 million, were costly, the importance of this message as our country is in the midst of such historical turmoil should not be lost. But AOC, who has done nothing to help heal the deep wounds of political divisiveness, sanctimoniously tweeted: "Something tells me Jesus would *not* spend millions of dollars on Super Bowl ads to make fascism look benign."

On Dec. 18, 2022, a United Airlines flight left Hawaii for San Francisco, Barely 2,200 feet in the air, the plane suddenly took a nosedive , dropping 1,425 feet within 10 seconds before correcting its trajectory. Those seconds were long enough for two passengers, Rod Williams II and his wife, to whisper silent prayers for a miracle.

Unlike AOC's fake January 6th trauma, the Williamses experienced real trauma, turning to their faith for Divine intervention. Undoubtedly, their faith has only been reinforced by this experience.

The faith exhibited by the Williams couple was of the same value as that exhibited in the Super Bowl ad. Yet AOC decided to take to Twitter to mock the latter.

This is especially interesting since, in 2020, she had joined with two other members of "The Squad," as she and her progressive cohorts are known, in sending a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, demanding he "eradicate anti-Muslim bigotry from Facebook." Apparently, she sees herself as a champion for Muslim values but not Christian values.

AOC will be up for reelection in 2024. Here's hoping that voters in her district will have come to their senses.

The next generation of Democrats are awful leaders

Thu, 02 Mar 2023 00:52:19 GMT

THE NEXT GENERATION OF DEMOCRATS ARE AWFUL LEADERS

James G. Zumwalt / March 1, 2023

World Net Daily ... In the dead of the night on an evening in 1972, with various U.S. Marine Corps units embarked upon an amphibious ship headed toward Vietnam, the alarm was sounded for "man overboard." The ship immediately executed a Williamson Turn – a figure eight maneuver seeking to get the vessel back to the approximate location where the person fell overboard – to initiate a search.

Automatically, unit commanders mustered their Marines to identify the missing man and to collect details on how he fell overboard. In less than 30 minutes, we knew the Marine's name and how he fell overboard.

Stoned on drugs, he tragically had gone aft to the ship's fantail where he suddenly jumped overboard. The act was observed by a sailor on watch who then sounded the alarm.

Trained for such events, the ship's crew and the Marine attachments onboard immediately sprang into action knowing what had to be done in hopes of recovering the Marine.

That was more than half a century ago, yet today, although he was in another unit, I still remember the Marine's name. The ship spent the next 24 hours searching desperately for him but failed to find him. Most likely, he died instantly as jumping off where he did would have resulted in him being sucked into the ship's giant churning screws, limiting his suffering to mere seconds.

As a band of brothers, the loss of one Marine is a loss for all.

Steps were quickly taken to search for any other drugs in the ship's living quarters and, later, to educate our Marines not only about drugs endangering one's personal safety but also the safety of all others who depended on him ashore and to keep them actively informed on the search status.

While there was obviously one Marine we could no longer help, others hopefully benefited from our immediate actions in consoling those in grief and helping them get past this incident to take a positive attitude toward the uncertain future that still awaited them.

This incident, and immediate actions in its wake, came to mind in the aftermath of the Feb. 3 East Palestine, Ohio, train wreck, releasing chemicals into the environment and devastating the local community.

While the actions of all during the 1972 man-overboard incident were methodical, allowing for an immediate assessment by senior decision-makers, that same sense of acting quickly and responsibly – this time by U.S. government and train company decision-makers – seemed totally lacking.

No single official represented this absence of responsibility more so than Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg who remained silent about the disaster for days afterward. He demonstrated he suffers an important leadership flaw as he's a leader in name only.

During the 2021 supply chain crisis, Buttigieg was taking paternity leave. Thus, as ships were backed up in our ports, he was nowhere to be found. When the East Palestine train wreck occurred, Buttigieg was again missing in action having taken personal time off. It took him 10 days to even mention the incident and three weeks to visit the site.

Meanwhile, his effort to blame the wreck on President Trump was refuted by the NTSB.

Buttigieg totally ignored the fact that when one assumes a high government office, doing so comes with a responsibility to quickly react to crises as victims facing an uncertain future want answers.

Democrats have sought to place a younger generation of leaders, such as Buttigieg, in positions as stepping stones to higher office. So far, that effort has failed miserably for our do-nothing Vice President Kamala Harris. As Buttigieg has again failed to do the right thing, he follows suit, also establishing himself in times of crisis as a Democrat of inaction.

As 2024 approaches, Democrats need to ask loudly and clearly, "Where have all our leaders gone?"

How many woke teachers ignored the historical significance of February 23rd?

Sat, 25 Feb 2023 05:03:49 GMT

HOW MANY WOKE TEACHERS IGNORED THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF FEBRUARY 23rd?

James G. Zumwalt / February 24, 2023

World Net Daily ... Sadly, America's educational system has fallen victim to a woke ideology that has put the spotlight on not what has made us great but on our past sins and present imperfections.

It's an ideology that ignores that the journey to reach any utopian society does not occur overnight but is an evolutionary process during which we stumble and fall, get back up and continue moving forward in an effort to get closer to that ultimate objective.

February 23rd should give us pause to wonder whether the ideological blindness that wokeism instills in many educators today caused them to allow that day to pass without reminding students a tribute is owed to those involved in two of our country's most iconic historic events occurring on that day, although 109 years apart.

Both events reflected the courage of some of our early pioneers who participated in that journey toward a social utopia–many by making the ultimate sacrifice in doing so.

On that day in 1836, Mexican Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna led an army in an attack against the Alamo, near present-day San Antonio, Texas. The Alamo was defended by about 200 Texas defenders – who were outnumbered more than 7-to-1 by Santa Anna – after declaring independence from Mexico. Among the defenders were Col. William Travis, Jim Bowie and Davy Crockett.

Attacked relentlessly by the Mexicans, Travis offered those who wanted to escape the inevitable defeat the chance to flee.

Legend has it, he drew a line in the sand with his sword, inviting all committed to Alamo's defense to cross over. Everyone but a man named Moses Rose did so. He was allowed to leave and was able to circumvent Mexican forces at night to make good on his escape.

Everyone who chose to remain knew a Mexican victory meant that the remaining Texans would be shown no quarter; yet they opted to remain and fight.

The Alamo fell on March 6 after a courageous 13-day defense – with all the defenders' bodies stacked in a funeral pyre and burned.

Santa Anna's victory was short-lived. His army was defeated the next month at the Battle of San Jacinto by General Sam Houston, a victory that delivered for Texans what they fought for, an independent state.

It would be 109 years later that the date of February 23rd would come to memorialize another day in American history, noted for generating one of the most unforgettable photographs of World War II.

The Battle of Iwo Jima in which U.S. Marines landed on the island to defeat its Japanese defenders, began on February 19, 1945, and ended on March 26.

It was February 23rd before the Marines reached the summit of Mount Suribachi

Although the fighting was far from over, U.S. operational leaders felt it was important, in an effort both to undermine Japanese morale and boost that of the Marines, to raise the American flag from where both sides could see it. The flag-raising by six Marines was captured in a Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph taken by Joe Rosenthal.

It later became the genesis for the historic Marine Corps Memorial erected just outside of Washington, D.C.

The selflessness and courage of both the Alamo defenders and the Iwo Jima Marines in sacrificing their lives for what they believed in is a story that should be reinforced in every student's study of American history.

Sadly, it's unlikely that many "woke" teachers did so this year because of their ignorance of American history and of the sacrifices made by earlier generations on their behalf.

Is Biden set to shaft our pregnant fighter pilots?

Thu, 23 Feb 2023 01:44:19 GMT

IS BIDEN SET TO SHAFT OUR PREGNANT FIGHTER PILOTS?

James G. Zumwalt / February 22, 2023

World Net Daily ... In combat, we seek to create an environment for war-fighters that allows them to focus on the single objective of defeating the enemy. Even the slightest distraction, especially in today's technologically advanced world of weaponry demanding full attention, can prove deadly.

Imagine, therefore, a woman in combat whose pregnancy distracts her or others serving with her from fully focusing upon their war-fighting priority as they worry about the health impacts upon an unborn child. Such concerns are real as determined below.

Battlefield stress, for example, can trigger a premature birth or otherwise impact upon a fetus. (Note: Since Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has confused the gender issue by being unable to define what a "woman" is, the term as used herein means a biological female – i.e., one programmed from birth to return the favor rather than a transgender woman, who is not.)

In a recent interview about his new movie, director James Cameron boaste that his film "Avatar: The Way of Water," which debuted December 16th, empowers women as its character "Neytiri" is a pregnant warrior. He claimed such is the "last bastion" to absolute female empowerment.

Criticizing testosterone as a "toxin" in need of being worked out of the male body, Cameron apparently envisioned pregnant female warriors as helping to do so. Cameron's comment subsequently triggered an article posing concerns "an identity politics-obsessed military will eventually put pregnant women in war zones."

While no law bans women in today's military from serving in combat, prior to 2003 they had largely been kept out of ground combat.

But wars in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrated the battlefront could quickly shift – a realization underscored when the first female warrior, Army Pfc. Jessica Lynch, was taken prisoner in 2003 upon just such a battlefield in Iraq. Fortunately for her, eight days later she was rescued by U.S. Special Operations forces.

In 2013, upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), Defense Secretary Leon Penetta decided to lift the combat ban against women, opening up 237,000 positions to them across all the services, which were given until January 2016 to provide any special exceptions.

Thereafter, women were allowed to serve in ground combat positions at the battalion level but, as one senior defense official made clear, "We are moving in the direction of women as infantry soldiers." Armed Services Chair Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., supported Panetta's decision with the statement, "It reflects the reality of 21st century military operations."

But a reality of military policy still kept sacred an unwillingness for pregnant women to serve in combat roles to any extent possible.

However, a recent initiative by President Joe Biden involving the U.S. Air Force (USAF) suggests he may be eager to put an end to its policies directing special consideration to the health risks tactical aviation places upon pregnant women.

His initiative to undercut these policies is unsurprising as he has presented himself as an anti-child president, evidenced by his pro-abortion stand, support for transgender surgeries for children and weird propensity to sniff the hair of young girls.

The 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces researched the matter of health issues to which pregnant women might be more susceptible, determining several existed.

For example, it was found, "During early pregnancy, a developing embryo/fetus undergoes complex morphological changes that can be detrimentally altered by high intensity vibration, noise, and cosmic ionizing radiation at high altitudes. High noise intensity has been associated with development of sensorineural hearing loss, prematurity, and intrauterine growth retardation.

Overexposure to short and long wave radiation has been cited for worsened pregnancy outcomes, including a higher rate of congenital malformation, low birth weight, infertility, and spontaneous abortion."

Thus the USAF implemented policies – voluntarily accepted by pregnant pilots – to limit the impact of the disproportionate health risks to which they would normally be exposed. With 10% of female USAF pilots being pregnant at any one time, about 400 were impacted by these flight restrictions last year.

But, under Biden's leadership, the Air Force is now investing in maternity flight suits, suggesting a quiet push is underway to get pregnant pilots back into the cockpit.

Because squadrons do not receive replacements for pilots on maternity leave, with such absences possibly stretching to two years, combat efficiency is greatly reduced.

This obviously reflects poorly upon our commander in chief ,who seems willing to screw our pregnant female warrior pilots, exposing their unborn children to damaging health risks, just to be able to claim improved combat efficiency.

Despite Cameron's claim that pregnant warriors represent the last bastion of female empowerment, a 1995 satirical article published in a professional naval magazine described a scenario taking things even further. It fictionalized a military parent-friendly program by which nurseries for children of crew members were provided onboard warships.

In 1995, the above scenario was seen as an absolute absurdity. However, in 2023, with a president in office whose social policies already endanger born and unborn children and a compliant JCS unwilling to challenge their woke commander in chief, nothing impacting negatively upon pregnant warriors seems beyond the pale.

And, who knows, with such civilian and military leadership in place, the absurdity of warship nurseries may not seem so absurd.

Professor promotes anti-Israel hatred, then plays victim card

Thu, 16 Feb 2023 01:31:39 GMT

PROFESSOR PROMOTES ANTI-ISRAEL HATRED, THEN PLAYS VICTIM CARD

James G. Zumwalt / February 15, 2023

World News Daily ... As of last year, it is estimated that more than 1 million lives were lost in the U.S. due to COVID-19 with that number possibly even being undercounted. For children, despite a relatively low overall mortality rate, COVID-19 was the leading cause of death in the U.S.

The above losses are measurable, but there is another loss our children may well be suffering, the impact of which will be immeasurable for years to come. Children in our educational institutions are being exposed to an ideology that promotes the worst in society – and it's being done in the name of diversity.

An example of this has recently come to light at George Washington University (GWU) where Dr. Lara Sheehi – a clinical psychologist – teaches a mandatory class on diversity. She practices clinically from "a trans-inclusive feminist and liberation theory model" and "works on race and white supremacy, (and) decolonial struggles."

Typically, one would expect a psychologist to provide thoughtful exchanges with students on a subject like diversity, recognizing the need not to plant seeds in young inquiring minds, entrusted to her, sanctioning violence as an option in pursuing societal objectives.

But somewhere along the line, Sheehi – a Muslim who sits on the board of the USA-Palestine Mental Health Network – lost her own sense of reason.

According to a recently filed complaint against her with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, Sheehi promotes an agenda that encourages the violent targeting of Israeli civilians.

The complaint noted that she brought in a class speaker who "advocated violence against Israelis – and by extension Jews," causing at least one Jewish student to feel "deeply unsettled and unsafe."

Supposedly, teaching a course about "diversity awareness" and seeking to "sensitize future therapists to biases," Sheehi verbally attacked a student who dared suggest "terrorist attacks" in Israel have killed civilians, including Americans.

Sheehi claimed the student's use of the term terrorist attack "invoked Islamophobia even though the student never mentioned Palestinians, Arabs, or Muslims in her comment."

When a complaint was initially filed with the university, Sheehi retaliated against the students involved. It is still unclear whether the university has taken disciplinary action against the professor.

The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, which now represents Sheehi, has issued a statement which, unsurprisingly, plays the victim card.

It argues she has been "wrongfully accused of discrimination and antisemitism" and "that these claims would otherwise not have resulted in such an exaggerated and prejudicial response … nor … found traction in public opinion if Dr. Sheehi were not Arab and her scholarship and activism were not focused on Palestine."

The group claims the complaint is "rooted in anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian racism."

If the filed claim against Sheehi is accurate – which should not be difficult to prove if verified by a classroom of students who witnessed what happened – what is outrageous is that a respected university like GWU, in its eagerness to embrace the diversity ideology, provided a Muslim extremist with a platform from which to preach hatred toward Israelis.

Educational institutions like George Washington University, irresponsibly seeking to check the box of promoting progressive thought, are unable to check the common-sense box in teaching an agenda furthering America's foundational values.

That this would happen at a university named after an American icon who helped establish those values is bitterly ironic.

'Weather balloon' part of China's sci-fi-like game plan?

Thu, 09 Feb 2023 01:25:46 GMT

IS CHINA'S " WEATHER BALLOON" PART OF CHINA'S SCI-FI-LIKE GAME PLAN?

James G. Zumwalt / February 8, 2023

World Net Daily ... An international incident created by the flight of a Chinese "weather balloon," entering U.S. airspace on Jan. 28 and transiting across the country, came to an abrupt end on Feb. 4.

The balloon was shot down over the Atlantic Ocean, within U.S. territorial waters, by a missile fired from an F-22 fighter jet.

Two important lessons should be extracted from this incident as we accept the fact that China, by no means, is our friend. This is especially so as a second Chinese balloon reportedly is making its way across Latin America. Understanding the following two lessons is a critical step in recognizing that President Joe Biden does not, based on how he dealt with the incident.

Understanding these lessons should have triggered a U.S. response to shoot the balloon down immediately upon first entering U.S. airspace rather than while exiting it.

Beijing has acknowledged the balloon is theirs, explaining it is simply a weather balloon that meandered off course while recording meteorological data. That response provides us with Lesson No.1: When China tells us something, we should NEVER, EVER accept its word. Lesson No. 2 reinforces Lesson No. 1 by answering the question "why should we not accept China's word?"

And most telling is the fact that the answer to this query comes directly from the mouth of China's defense minister. It is all part of a speech he gave at a secret meeting in Beijing in 2005 that memorialized China's 21st century intentions regarding the United States.

The speech was delivered by (then) vice-chairman of China's Military Commission, a General Chi Hoatian, as he was preparing to retire. It promoted a most disturbing foreign policy toward America that is so outrageous that it sounds as if it was bizarre script material for a science fiction movie.

However, as one fully grasps what Chi proposed back then and compares it to what is occurring today, the realization arises we may have already been victimized by it. We need to recognize that what may once have sounded like fiction is now reality as China is hellbent on achieving global domination.

Chi's speech took his audience on a long journey, via a circuitous route, building the case for China's development as an economic powerhouse and its subsequent domination of the global community.

He boasted about the Chinese people as a superior race and, as such, their willingness to make whatever sacrifices were needed to establish China as the world's dominant power, even if it meant killing enemy women and children. He concluded the only obstacle in China's path to this world domination was America.

But Chi announced there was a final solution in the works to deal with what he called the "America issue."

Chi explained that China's 21st century population growth will strain the country's resources, necessitating the need for its people to occupy other territories outside of China's borders. He rationalized that while regional states like Taiwan, Vietnam and others could be targeted, they would be unable to meet all of China's expansionist needs. The country that would, however, is America!

Before dismissing the idea as preposterous, one needs to understand how Chi envisioned accomplishing this objective as it sounds frighteningly familiar to something we are experiencing today.

Chi discussed World War II, lauding Japan's surprise attack against America but chiding the Japanese for lacking the racial superiority to pull off a final victory.

He recognized that a 21st-century war with America would be even more devastating to both sides than World War II was and, therefore, the situation demands a final solution to cleanse the U.S. of its people while leaving the country intact for the Chinese to occupy and exploit.

The most logical way to do this, General Chi reported, was by using biological weapons, boasting that China had been heavily engaged in research on biological weapons.

Less than two decades after Chi's speech, the world was on lockdown from COVID-19 – a virus that most likely was created in China's Wuhan laboratory. If so, then the question is was its release accidental or intentional? It is the writer's opinion it was accidental as China had yet to develop the type of virus Chi envisioned – one that was race specific in targeting victims.

There are indicators Chinese researchers today are working to develop just such a race-specific virus. China has been seeking out data stored by companies doing DNA analysis.

Millions of Westerners have been voluntarily donating samples to these companies, eager to discover their ancestral roots. But, by doing so, they provide China with an endless bank of just the kind of data it needs to develop a virus capable of targeting Caucasians. Now 93 years old, Chi may live long enough to see it happen.

With Chinese intentions set on eliminating America's population in its own "Pearl Harbor" attack, it is extremely risky for us to allow a "weather balloon" to float across the entire width of the country, for whatever purpose China intended, before shooting it down.

Navy divers are already at work searching for the remnants of the balloon, which are believed to have plummeted into the Atlantic Ocean within a square area the size of 15-by-15 football fields.

It appears the balloon was armed with a self-destruct explosive capability and, despite China's claims it meandered off course, it did have a maneuverability capability as well.

While described as a weather balloon, it is much more likely to have been designed for a military purpose, although exactly what remains a mystery. China has satellites revolving around planet Earth that could provide surveillance data, unless their orbits could not surveil what a "meandering" balloon could.

But such a balloon is also capable of providing a delivery system for an electromagnetic pulse attack (EMP), destroying electrical grids and denying users electricity for months or even years. Experts have estimated that an EMP attack could kill up to 90% of Americans by starvation and societal collapse.

Thus, these balloons present a serious potential threat to America, especially when Chi's intentions concerning our country are factored in as well. Accordingly, they should be destroyed immediately upon entering U.S. airspace, not upon departing it.

In 2019, a naive presidential candidate Joe Biden downplayed the threat China poses to the U.S., claiming , "They're not competition for us." He said that at a time Beijing was already working on developing a genocidal killing virus to cleanse America.

That naive presidential candidate now occupies the White House an is still oblivious to China's threat to us from the dark side.

MAY GOD HELP US .

Bad boy Hunter is a victim!

Sat, 04 Feb 2023 01:44:12 GMT

BAD BOY HUNTER IS A VICTIM!

James G. Zumwalt / February 3, 2023

World Net Daily ... One of the most extreme efforts by a news publication to explain away a miscreant's disgraceful behavior was attempted in January by the New York Times (NYT). It published a puff piece seeking to explain away the absolutely egregious social and possible criminal behavior of Hunter Biden, suggesting he was an emotionally damaged victim of his older brother's death.

In an article incorporating more fiction than fact, the NYT sought to paint Hunter as one who had difficulty coping with brother Beau's brain cancer death, at age 46, in May 2015. The article was particularly disturbing for readers, such as myself, who have also experienced the tragic loss of an older brother we admired and loved.

Only a year younger than Beau, Hunter should have been equipped with the emotional maturity to deal with such a loss. But the Times claims the tragedy was the catalyst for putting Hunter on a journey to the dark side involving both drug and sexual addiction.

Even if the article had merit, many of us, at ages younger than Hunter who lost older brothers, never felt a similar compulsion to dishonor their memory by engaging in a life of debauchery. Yet, in a further effort to avoid holding Hunter personally accountable for embarking upon his journey, the paper obfuscated the issue.

It failed to acknowledge a spoiled, self-indulgent, narcissistic and totally irresponsible Hunter possessed those qualities prior to Beau's death and thus was responsible for mapping out his own destructive lifestyle independent thereof.

Beau had honorably served in the Delaware Army National Guard, which included a tour in Iraq, eager to make a contribution to his country's war effort. Undoubtedly with some help from his father (aka "the Big Guy"), Hunter was able to obtain an age waiver to join the U.S. Navy Reserve as a public affairs officer in 2013.

But while Beau served honorably and long enough to attain the rank of major, Hunter lasted only nine months in uniform, ultimately receiving an administrative discharge in 2014 after testing positive for cocaine usage. Thus, Hunter had already set out on his destructive life's path at least 15 months prior to Beau's death.

Another indicator it was not a grieving Hunter that was trying to deal with the trauma of his brother's death was his affair with Beau's widow, Hallie. Hunter began dating her in March 2017. He later suggested the relationship was not difficult to explain "because it came out of a real overwhelming grief that we both shared, and we were together and trying to do the right thing.

And that grief turned into a hope for a love that maybe could replace what we lost, and it didn't work." More than any sense of grief, the affair suggests a sick Hunter was competing with his dead brother, ultimately claiming Hallie as his winning trophy.

While claiming the two were "incredibly lucky" to have the family's support, that obviously did not include the support of Hunter's estranged wife, Kathleen, to whom he was still married.

As Hunter remained embarked upon a journey allowing him to meet his demand for drugs, it was no surprise that his relationship with Hallie quickly disintegrated, leaving both to go their separate ways, with Hunter's lust, at least temporarily, satisfied.

It is incredible the NYT could publish such a pro-Hunter piece after reading through a number of his emails to young female associates to whom he promised financial assistance or threatened to withhold wages to extract sexual favors. There were at least four female employees in the law firm where Hunter worked with whom he had sexual relationships.

Taunting these women in such a manner was despicable and can in no way be excused by his brother's loss. And, when he could not get the real thing, Hunter sought virtual sexual acts with these women.

Should there be any doubt the laptop from which these emails were copied was Hunter's, his lawyers admitted the same recently by requesting a criminal probe be conducted of President Donald Trump and his allies for laptop data "stolen" from their client.

Included on his payroll was his brother Beau's widow and even the widow's sister with whom he also had a sexual affair. The vast amounts of money Hunter brought in from foreign sources enabled him to make other additions to his payroll as well.

One was a woman whose mixed skills reportedly included a job as a former stripper and a current job as a basketball coach for Hunter's daughter. It is very unlikely her compensation was for making her basketball skills available as evidenced by her later lawsuit against Hunter for child support.

Hunter got a thrill either filming his sexual exploits with women or telling them in advance what he expected from them. He inquired of one when she would be available to FaceTime adding, "If we FT the rule has to be no talk of anything but sex and we must be naked and we have to do whatever the other person asks within reason."

With such a sex-crazed ne'er-do-well as Hunter, there is no telling what he might have considered to be "within reason."

Of note too is the fact that several of Hunter's sex partners were also mentioned in Suspicious Activity Reports submitted by financial institutions flagging transactions involving Hunter and his company. Such reports are triggered by transfers of large sums of money.

It is inexcusable that the New York Times would make such an effort to defend a man obviously devoid of any moral compass who believed the name "Biden" empowered him to do whatever he wanted whenever he wanted and to whomever he wanted to do it to. There apparently was absolutely no limit on how far he would go to demean women to satisfy his sexual desires.

With its Hunter-is-really-a-nice-guy story, the Times has lost the last bit of journalistic credibility it had left.

Turkey: NATO's black sheep

Thu, 02 Feb 2023 15:21:47 GMT

TURKEY: NATO'S BLACK SHEEP

James G. Zumwalt / February 1, 2023

World Net Daily ... In the aftermath of World War II, with the Soviet Union replacing Germany as the major threat to stability in Europe, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established to provide collective security for members against Soviet expansionism. In 1949, the U.S., Canada and 10 European nations became its founding members.

Today, NATO boasts 30 members committed to the "Three Musketeer" pledge of one for all and all for one. In accordance with Article 5 of the NATO treaty, members agreed to a collective defense warning potential aggressors an attack against one is an attack against all.

NATO's membership today includes two in North America, 27 in Europe and one in Eurasia. Five members share a total of 754 border miles abutting Russia. Moscow partially justified its invasion of Ukraine over concerns it too would join NATO.

But Russian President Vladimir Putin's unprovoked military action against Ukraine only encouraged two other regional neighbors – Finland, sharing an 830 mile continuous border with Russia, and Sweden – to apply for NATO membership. Should Finland join, the total border mileage abutting Russia will more than double to 1,584 miles.

States seeking NATO membership must meet certain political, economic and military standards.

Minimally, these include : 1) upholding democracy, to include tolerating diversity; 2) progressing toward a market economy; 3) maintaining a military firmly under civilian control; 4) acting as a good regional neighbor that respects sovereignty outside its own borders and 5) working to achieve compatibility with NATO forces.

Clearly, both Finland and Sweden meet these standards. Applicant states must receive unanimous approval to join. Thus, motivated by the concept that the more members there are, the merrier NATO is, all 30 states should support the addition.

To date, 28 members have. Of the remaining two votes to be cast, by Hungary and Turkey, we can count on the former voting "yea" with the latter voting "nay."

Undoubtedly, Turkey has delayed casting its vote in hopes one of the other 29 members would object first, letting Ankara "off the hook." Were a prior "nay" vote cast, it would spare Turkey making a vote contrary to NATO's interests.

Turkey joined NATO three years after the alliance was founded. However, , the Turkey of 1952 is not the Turkey of 2023. See below.

Many of NATO's members joined years after Turkey did, prompted by the fall of the Soviet Union. Its collapse freed up several East European states within the Soviet Bloc to go their separate ways, pursuing freedom and capitalism. As such, they gradually began meeting the NATO standards above and were motivated to join over fears that, while the Soviet Union may be dead, Russia was not.

And, understanding Russia's aggressive psyche, they knew NATO was their safety shield.

But while these European nations turned towards the light of liberty, Turkey, benefiting from promoting individual freedoms and capitalism during the second half of the 20th century, has taken a turn toward the dark side during the past two decades. This redirection has been led by its current president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Interestingly, Erdogan – who seeks Turkey's return to the glory days of the Ottoman Empire – has drawn close to another autocratic leader, Putin, who seeks Russia's return to the glory days of the Soviet empire.

Undoubtedly, this relationship puts Erdogan in a precarious position, forcing him either to act in NATO's best interests, by voting yea for Finland and Sweden's membership, or in Russia's best interests, by voting nay. The last thing Putin wants to see is a NATO expansion, and only Erdogan holds the trump card for preventing this.

In a ploy to suggest a nay vote by Erdogan is not linked to the blossoming Turkish/Russian relationship, Ankara already sent Sweden a warning not to expect support for its NATO bid for failing to crack down on exiled Kurdish militants who publicly burned a Quran in Stockholm. If Erdogan anticipated this would stop Finland's bid as well, Finland is hinting otherwise as it may continue without Sweden.

This would place Erdogan in the uncomfortable position of coming up with a new excuse to stop Finland's bid.

The Putin/Erdogan "bromance" has evolved over the past few years. In 2017, Turkey announced , over NATO objections, it was buying Russia's S-400 missile defense system – a system designed to shoot down US F-35 combat aircraft.

Ironically, Turkey had placed a massive order for F-35s. But since Erdogan's decision to purchase the S-400 was contrary to a collective NATO pledge to move away from Russian systems, the U.S. kicked Turkey out of the F-35 program.

Russia's gain of $2.5 billion for selling the S-400 system and a U.S. loss of half a billion dollars for terminating the F-35 program was not quite in keeping with the Three Musketeer pledge.

More recently, following Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Ankara refused to join in on Western sanctions against Moscow, welcoming Russian oligarchs into Turkey.

Under Erdogan's leadership, Turkey has been edging back to its Ottoman Empire days in ways, demonstrating a divide developing between Ankara and NATO on social issues such as human rights. For example, he has been undermining the rights of women, reducing to 12 the legal age of consent to marry.

There have been other incidents evidencing a widening divide between Turkey and its NATO partners. These include Turkey's:

Initial refusal in 2016 to allow the U.S. access to its own base in Incirlik as operations into Iraq and Afghanistan were being planned.

Violence in 2017 by Erdogan's security detail in attacking and beating peaceful U.S. and Kurdish American demonstrators in Washington, D.C., including women and children, during a state visit.

Aid to Libyan rival military groups in 2019.

Recent airstrikes against Kurdish militias in northern Syria and threats to invade that country.

Toss in the consideration that Turkey currently conducts robust trading with both Russia and China and the question arises: Where exactly do Ankara's loyalties lie?

North Korea's U.S. trophy is an open wound 55 years hence

Sat, 28 Jan 2023 19:34:55 GMT

NORTH KOREA'S U.S. TROPHY IS AN OPEN WOUND 55 YEARS HENCE

James G. Zumwalt / January 27, 2023

World Net Daily ... Fifty-five years ago this month, on Jan. 23, 1968, an international incident involving a U.S. Navy warship occurred on the high seas off the coast of North Korea. The incident remains a black mark on the Navy's proud history.

The signals intelligence ship USS Pueblo (AGER-2) was operating in international waters when she was subjected to an unprovoked attack by several North Korean gunboats, torpedo boats and MIG-21 fighters.

The U.S. should not have been surprised by this move. Recognizing America's focus was on fighting the Vietnam War, North Korea had become increasingly bolder, undertaking several acts of aggression against U.S. forces on the Korean peninsula.

Lacking an escort vessel and minimally armed, Pueblo was unable to defend herself, forcing the ship to surrender. But, while the seizure was humiliating enough, three decades later the ship would be dealt yet another humiliation – this time at the hands of our own government.

Now 78 years old and long ago eclipsed by advances in naval technology that make her obsolete today, Pueblo still remains on the Navy's active duty rolls – the second-oldest ship in its inventory, right behind the 226-year-old, Revolutionary War-era USS Constitution.

Ironically, while the Constitution now serves as a museum , docked in Boston Harbor, Pueblo serves as a museum as well.

However, she does so without the Navy's consent and at a location more than 6,700 miles distant from where the Constitution is docked. Pueblo is tied to a pier in the Taedong River in Pyongyang, North Korea. And, as long as she remains there, she will never be removed from the Navy's active service rolls.

After Pueblo's capture in 1968, during which one U.S. crewmember was killed, the remaining 82 were incarcerated and subjected to torture. It took 11 months for their release to be affected. However, the Pueblo was not part of the release agreement, still remaining in North Korean hands today.

Immediately after Pueblo's capture, she had been taken to the closest North Korean port, Wonsan, on the country's east coast. She remained there for over three decades. But in the late 1990s, in the waning days of Bill Clinton's presidency, the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il, saw an opportunity to relocate the ship to Pyongyang where he could proudly display it as a prize trophy to his people.

At the time, the Clinton administration was eager to conclude a deal with North Korea concerning the rogue nation's effort to develop a nuclear arsenal capable of producing nuclear weapons grade plutonium.

Recognizing how eager the Americans were for a deal, Kim agreed to stop work on the reactor in exchange for the U.S. and European nations providing him with a new light water reactor, along with 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil annually.

The North Koreans well understood how to play U.S. administrations, which, historically, have preferred negotiation and appeasement to engaging in hardball with Pyongyang. And, since the transit of the Pueblo to Pyongyang involved a voyage of more than 1,000 miles through international waters, Kim demanded and received a pledge from Clinton not to interfere with the transit.

Clinton issued a "hands off" order to his senior naval commanders, granting the North Koreans safe passage.

There could have been no greater humiliation for the Navy to suffer. It was simply forced to watch with hands tied as a ship, captured at the cost of American blood, brazenly set sail through international waters.

An interesting observation about the Pueblo is detectible today, although not visible to all due to the way the ship is tied to the pier. Visitors board the ship from its well-maintained port side. However, only observable from the opposite riverbank is the vessel's deteriorating and rusting starboard side.

While not intended as such, the two faces of Pueblo are symbolic of the two-faces of Kim in negotiating the win of Pueblo 's relocation with no intention of ever honoring the nuclear deal Clinton so badly sought.

Kim was a student of history, enabling him to appreciate what could be extracted during negotiations from an American president lacking a similar appreciation for North Korean negotiating tactics.

An empowered Kim trumped Clinton, leaving us with an historical wound yet to heal.

Why transition to EVs is set to be a national disaster

Thu, 26 Jan 2023 20:42:15 GMT

WHY TRANSITION TO EVs IS SET TO BE A NATIONAL DISASTER

James G. Zumwalt / January 25, 2023

World Net Daily ... Ask most residents of Cincinnati, Ohio, where their subway is located and you will be told there is no subway. But their response is understandable.

Under the streets of Cincinnati today, a vast intersecting web of tunnels with subway tracks in place actually does exist, construction of which began in 1920. However, due to the Depression and an approaching world war, construction was never completed. Most access points are now cemented shut.

Visitors to North Korea's capital city cannot help but notice the most dominant feature on Pyongyang's skyline. It is a narrow, pyramid-shaped building rising 105 stories skyward. While construction on what was to be the world's tallest hotel began in 1987, the Ryugyong Hotel project was abandoned in 1992. Although some subsequent work ensued, it remains unfinished today.

Work was halted due to a funding shortage as well as the government's failure to fully analyze various engineering obstacles that would be encountered during construction.

The above are recognized today as two of history's eight biggest failed construction projects. However, of note is the difference for their failures. Construction stoppage of the Cincinnati subway was unforeseeable – the result of a Depression soon followed by growing global hostilities.

But thework stoppage on the Ryugyong Hotel was foreseeable. Insufficient funding by a government unable to feed its own people and its failure to think through all the engineering issues to be encountered beforehand demonstrated incompetence that led to a national embarrassment.

While the time and money spent on the Cincinnati subway construction was a waste, the impact of its loss was primarily on a local level. However, the time and money wasted on the Ryugyong Hotel impacted on a national level.

As the U.S. embarks upon a policy of transitioning from fossil-fueled cars to electric vehicles (EVs), shutting down our fossil fuel production to motivate citizens in this direction, and with states like California mandating no more of the former after 2035, unaddressed issues posture America to suffer its own "Ryugyong moment."

For us, however, in addition to the loss of time and money is the potential of lost lives as well.

Ironically, we are blindly racing to cross the EV transition finish line without considering the impact of shutting down fossil fuel production, knowing these vehicles will be dependent upon an electricity energy source that itself is 80% reliant upon fossil fuels.

While fossil fuels are obviously important to operating most cars today, we cannot ignore the fact they are just as important in providing electricity tomorrow even in an all-EV world.

Various actions being undertaken by Democrats suggest no one grasps the overall picture. During a House Natural Resources Committee hearing in November 2022, California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock shared insights into how Democrats are setting America up for disaster by pulling in two different directions concerning EV production.

He explained that copper is critical to such production, of which the U.S. has ample reserves. One such major copper deposit location is the Resolution project in Arizona, commended for using block cave technology to shrink its environmental footprint.

As such, it was all set to be activated for commercial copper production when President Donald Trump left office, only to be blocked by President Joe Biden soon afterward.

Imploring the committee chairman to reverse course, McClintock pointed out the obvious:

"On the one hand, you want to mandate … electric cars … all in the name of saving the planet. Yet, on the other hand, you want to radically restrict mining, also in the name of saving the planet. Well, you can't do both."

McClintock went on to lambast Democrats for ignoring the need to have operating by 2035 over 300 mines to meet EV needs not only for copper but graphite, lithium, nickel and cobalt, according to industry forecasts. In fact, he added, EVs require six times the mineral input of fossil-fueled cars, necessitating more, not less, mining.

It is estimated mining operations to manufacture a thousand-pound EV battery equates to moving 500,000 pounds of earth.

To underscore the absence of Democratic reasoning on the subject, McClintock stated, "If it is your contention that the mining required to produce electric cars is a threat to the environment, then you are also admitting that the electric cars that require it are a threat to the environment."

Democrats also ignore the fact, as U.S. mining production decreases and EV sales increase, we will have to rely more on mining production in other countries , such as Africa, where laborers will endure horrifyingly harsh working conditions to meet our needs.

While McClintock's comments just focused on the mining issue, there are several other EV issues in need of ample discussion before launching a full court press to transition.Some of these include:

Fire Hazard: The chemical fire hazard created by EV batteries, ignited either by a collision or, as Hurricane Ian demonstrated, by salt water exposure, are difficult to extinguish. In some cases, while appearing to be out, they flare up later. This danger should be of special concern to parents whose children now ride electric school buses.

Charger Infrastructure: Major snowstorms have left EV drivers with limited power to heat their vehicles, eventually losing all power. A limited charging station infrastructure triggered long waits and raised concerns of system overload.

Substation Outages: The electric grid is becoming a popular target for domestic terrorists as over 70 substations were hit in 2022, obviously creating a negative impact on transportation mobility in an EV world.

Transformer Replacement: Concerns have long existed over the limited availability of large power transformers in the event of a major power grid catastrophe.

Residential Chargers: Reportedly , the owner of an electric Hummer plugged his battery in on a Sunday, learning it would not be fully charged until Friday.

Battery Disposal: The massive EV battery packs are not easily recyclable or disposable, creating a major ecological problem concerning disposal.

An interesting observation was shared by a chauffeur working the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where climate change experts keep sounding the alarm. She claimed many of the elites rejected EVs, concerned about how "dangerous" they are and insisting on being driven in fossil-fueled cars.

While Biden is cutting our domestic energy lifelines to transition America to EVs, he does so recklessly by failing to consider all possible factors of his Green Movement campaign. He should consider the consequences of this based on what has shockingly been occurring in pushing us in another alternative energy direction – constructing massive wind turbines to generate electricity.

Several disasters have already occurred in which General Electric turbines, some taller than the Statue of Liberty, have collapsed – believed to be caused by foreseeable consequences ignored in the rush to install turbine capacity.

Absent fuller debate on the subject, the transition to EVs has the potential of becoming a national disaster. One critic concerned about the auto industry relying on an exclusive EV solution is the president of Toyota. He vows to keep manufacturing fossil-fueled cars.

As a result – who knows? – perhaps by mid-century EVs will have gone the way of the Edsel with Toyotas saving America from a totally embarrassing "Ryugyong moment!"

What military brass can learn from Super Bowl LVII

Thu, 19 Jan 2023 01:20:15 GMT

WHAT MILITARY BRASS CAN LEARN FROM SUPER BOWL LV11

James G. Zumwalt / January 18, 2023

World Net Daily ... We know the National Football League's (NFL) Super Bowl LVII will be played in Glendale, Arizona, on Feb. 12, 2023. We do not yet know which two teams will compete to be the last one standing. Regardless of which teams do play, it would be interesting to assemble senior military leaders to watch the game to ensure they grasp an important lesson the game will reveal.

What we do know about the two competing Super Bowl finalists already is that they achieved the mission goals they set for themselves at the beginning of the season and sought progressively to achieve.

These goals included identifying the best talent possible at each position, training them to perform as a team, winning enough games to make it to the playoffs to compete in the Super Bowl and winning that final contest to claim its trophy.

Whichever team it is that wins on Feb. 12, the question for our military leaders is this: What was the single most important attribute exhibited by the Super Bowl victor?

While the answer will be obvious – performance – this is where a fundamental difference will manifest itself – for while the NFL coach and military leader should apply the same performance yardstick, they do not.

The primary mission for both - whether on the playing field or the battlefield - is to field the best possible team of warriors.

And so...the question that arises is, why make use of different yardsticks? After all, a glaring statistic in professional football explains how different yardsticks are applied.

In 2020, seven out of 10 NFL players were black . This tells us that winning positions to play on the 2023 Super Bowl team were related strictly to individual performance on the field with zero focus on the team's diversity makeup. The purpose of diversity, supposedly, is to put together a team that is fairly reflective of society's racial makeup.

But an NFL that fields black players by a ratio of 7-to-3 over non-black players is not representative of the racial balance in America – it is representative of how coaches, whose livelihoods very much turn on their team's success, look at performance through glasses with color-blind lenses.

As far as NFL coaches are concerned, when a player tries out for a team position, that player lacks a racial imprint. He is just a number. This allows the individual selection process for team members to become one that is purely performance-based.

While snowflakes might consider what follows to be a racist observation, statistics don't lie. And statistics from other professional sports support the fact that, all being equal, blacks are better natural athletes than whites. The demographic profile for blacks playing in the National Basketball Association was a whopping 81.1% in 2020.

Only Major League Baseball had a profile far more balanced as a mirror representation of society with a 6.8% black-player membership.

But while the NFL coach strictly uses a performance-related yardstick, our military leaders apply one, imposed upon them by a commander in chief who five times dodged serving in the military, pushing a diversity factor that goes beyond race to include sex and gender identity as well.

The immediate impact of applying such a military yardstick should be obvious.

While the NFL's yardstick will give a starting position nod to the most qualified performer, the military's yardstick may not, should the most qualified performer fail to meet diversity standards. For the NFL coach, the end result is he knows every team position is filled by an A-team member; however, for the military commander, this will not be the case.

Needless to say, this should be a major concern since what occurs on the battlefield is obviously of much greater importance than what occurs on the playing field. While a less than most-qualified sports performer may be the cause for losing a game, a less than most-qualified warrior on the battlefield can get others killed.

Yet, despite increasing criticism from defense experts that embracing a progressive agenda is harming performance, senior military leaders blindly embrace Biden's policies.

We will never hear the NFL being criticized for its lopsided representation favoring black players over white for one simple reason: team owners, players and fans all want to be associated with winning – so diversity be damned.

At a time military budgeting should be maximized to meet expanding global challenges, such funding is being wasted on inclusion initiatives. The military should take heed of the recent problem commercial air travelers suffered due to industry funds being similarly misdirected to social programs rather than meeting the needs of the aviation industry.

In the aftermath of an FAA computer outage on Jan. 11 that caused it to ground thousands of domestic flights, pilots were asked about the administration's 2023 budgeting for the FAA and Department of Transportation (DOT). Most were upset money was being tossed at needless personnel programs while the FAA's technological infrastructure is in desperate need of work.

As an example, after DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg returned from his two months of maternity leave after only being on the job six months, he turned his attention to spending money and time to one such senseless endeavor.

Buttigieg took offense that informational updates in the industry, which for years have been known as "Notice to Airman" (NOTAM), referenced the male gender and sought to change it. Today, while such notices have the same acronym, it stands for "Notice to Air Missions." Obviously, this ridiculous act of wokeism did nothing to improve passenger safety, but at least Buttigieg felt better.

J.P. Tristiani, an aviation expert, who is both a pilot and a veteran, made an observation about the FAA and DOT that is just as applicable to the military as well. "Ridiculous," he said, as "neither the DOT nor FAA should be involved in being a social 'petri dish' investing in such nonsense."

Like the military that has a responsibility for the safety of its warriors, ensuring they are finely honed and equipped to prevail on the battlefield, Tristiani notes the FAA has a responsibility to ensure passenger safety at all times and that investing in nonessential issues "has nothing to do with the highest standards and training … required in this highly technical industry."

Undoubtedly, our Defense Department leaders enjoyed the pro-military press triggered by the 2022 movie "Top Gun: Maverick." The plot involved the training of a select group of top gun U.S. Navy pilots for a covert mission, requiring split-second timing and coordination, against an enemy target – a mission that ultimately was successfully completed.

Our military leaders probably were pleased with the diversity representation of the pilots in the film. But, in reality, success of such a mission would have turned on which performance yardstick was applied to field the aerial team.

Any pilot entrusted with this mission would want to know beforehand, regardless of the group's ultimate diversity representation, that every aircraft involved was being flown by an A-team member.

This is not an assurance that can readily be given today due to the yardstick Biden has foolishly imposed upon the military.

McCarthy's win reveals Pelosi's power lust

Thu, 12 Jan 2023 21:10:09 GMT

McCARTHY'S WIN REVEALS PELOSI'S POWER LUST

James G. Zumwalt /January 11, 2023

World Net Daily ... The multiple voting rounds for a new speaker in the House of Representatives brought back memories of the 1868 nursery rhyme "Ten Little Indians."

While the rhyme was written to teach children to count backwards starting from 10, in the House vote for a new speaker the starting number was 20 – the 20 Republican holdouts denying candidate Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., an early victory.

The rhyme explains the reduction, one-by-one, of members of a group of 10 Indians – a similar fate that eventually befell the 20 holdouts as each round progressed.

It would take 15 rounds before McCarthy won on a vote that stretched into the early morning hours of Saturday, Jan 7. Just like law enforcement investigators conduct lengthy interrogations of criminal suspects using confinement and pressure to wear them down, the same combination worked with most of the 20 who, one-by-one, broke away to support McCarthy.

A brief explanation is in order for those somewhat befuddled by the 15 round voting marathon. After all, with a total of 435 seats in the House, McCarthy needed 218 votes – one vote more than half – to win but, in the end, achieved victory with 216 votes. How did that happen?

Republicans hold 222 seats to Democrats' 212 in the 118th Congress. Democrats actually had 213 seats but Virginia Rep. Donald McEachin, who was reelected in November, died of cancer before the 118th Congress could convene, thus leaving his party one vote short during the speakership run. A special election will be held next month to fill that seat.

The problem with McCarthy reaching the 218 vote total arose as 20 Republicans refused to vote for him. Repeated votes were thus required, with each failure leaving McCarthy to negotiate further with the holdouts to swing them over. He was able to do so with 14, giving him a 216 total – obviously still two votes shy of the required 218.

However, on the 15th vote, the six remaining Republican holdouts all voted "present," allowing a new House rule to kick in. Under this rule, if "present" votes prevented the mandatory 218 votes from being obtained, only a majority of the yea or nay votes cast for a new speaker was necessary to win. Accordingly, McCarthy secured a 216 to 212 victory, becoming the 55th speaker of the House.

The House has elected a speaker 127 times since 1789 with every election since 1923 accomplished via a single vote.

McCarthy's 15-vote run was well short of the longest and most contentious speaker election in history, occurring in 1856 after two months and 133 rounds. The issue then was slavery expansion. The winning candidate, Rep. Nathaniel Banks, was anti-slavery. The political war to elect Banks was a prelude to the Civil War that followed.

McCarthy's win, described as "one of the most dramatic, chaotic and ugly scenes in the history of the House of Representatives … (and) absolutely extraordinary," was definitely a far cry from the single round, rubber-stamp approval for speaker given to McCarthy's predecessor, Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., by a Democratic House majority.

The day before Pelosi's reelection as speaker on Jan. 3, 2019, her daughter, Alexandra Pelosi, (affectionately?) said of her mother, "She'll cut your head off and you won't even know you're bleeding. That's all you need to know about her. No one ever won betting against Nancy Pelosi. She's preserved." (One can only wonder what gift is given such a mother on Mothers' Day.)

Sadly, Alexandra's description of Nancy brings to mind a political Attila the Hun. Mother Pelosi was brutal during her reign of power – one with party members toeing the line or else.

As Pelosi's stature has now been reduced and she is no longer able to wield the political fear she could earlier, we will undoubtedly start hearing stories about her reign of terror and get to appreciate the disdain she so richly deserves.

But while Democrats took potshots at Republicans and their infighting before finally electing McCarthy, it should be clear Republicans exercised a level of independent thought of which House Democrats were incapable under Pelosi's leadership.

The movie "The Wizard of Oz" reveals what happens when an authoritarian is made "all powerful" – a role with which Democrats foolishly imbued Pelosi. Republicans sought to make the speaker more answerable to House members for overreaching actions. Pelosi was the gold standard for speaker abuse.

The Post Traumatic Political Stress Disorder inflicted by Pelosi's tenure may be responsible for one concession McCarthy made to win votes from among the 20 holdouts – one most telling about her lust for power.

The concession involved the "motion to vacate" – a parliamentary procedure allowing members of the House to submit a request for the speaker to step down. Originally, any individual House member could make such a motion.

This obviously concerned an authoritative Pelosi who watered down the potential for such a coup against her, mandating that only a party leader or majority vote by a party could force a vote of confidence. McCarthy's concession returns to the original intent.

Meanwhile, Pelosi has the audacity to claim Republicans fail "to bring dignity to this body" with their "cavalier attitude in electing a speaker" which she describes as "frivolous, disrespectful and unworthy of this institution."

Unbelievably, this comment comes from a speaker who disrespected her office and the entire country in 2020 when she ripped up her copy of President Donald Trump's State of the Union speech on national television as he completed his address to Congress.

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a two-faced witch.

While President Joe Biden also relished the chaotic GOP election for speaker, a danger to America does exist due to the 20 Republican holdouts having tasted blood waging their fight against McCarthy. Mostly ultraconservatives, they had seven major concessions met by him and, therefore, may utilize a similar tactic in future votes.

Speaker McCarthy will definitely have his work cut out for him in taming this bloc as he pushes a softer, kinder, united Republican agenda forward. Democrats are banking on his failure to do so for the next two years.

Congressional political infighting, whether inter or intra party, takes the focus off "we the people" – a situation not helped by an incompetent president who, upon taking office, promised to be a unifier, only to act contrary ever since.

Two world wars of the 20th century caused our politicians to unite, doing what was needed to meet those challenges. One wishes the same sense of national unity would spring forward in Congress today as it faces issues such as a pandemic, inflation, supply-chain woes, international conflicts and increasing crime rates, just to name a few.

McCarthy needs to adopt a Winston Churchillian leadership role in Congress, getting so few to do so much for so many in a unified and productive effort to meet these challenges.

How goes McCarthy is how goes America's future.

Biden visits the Potemkin village created for his viewing

Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:54:43 GMT

BIDEN VISITS THE POTEMKIN VILLAGE CREATED FOR HIS VIEWING

James G. Zumwalt / January 10, 2023

World Net Daily ... While the term "Potemkin village'' may be based on myth, today it conveys a meaning suggestive of an intentional deception. It allegedly is based on an incident occurring in 1787 in Crimea.

Russian Czarina Catherine the Great was to be shown a village involved in an effort aimed at transitioning Crimea to become part of Russia. Grigoriy Potemkin headed this effort but was lacking success by the time Catherine was scheduled to visit.

Potemkin devised a plan to deceive the Czarina about his failure. Knowing she would be viewing the village from a road situated on the far side of a river, he created the false image of a thriving village on the near side.

He erected buildings with false facades, brought in Russian peasants to serve as villagers, created the illusion of numerous domestic animal herds when there was really but one, positioned stacks of bags marked "wheat" that were only filled with sand, etc. All this was done purely to hide the poverty and ruin that truly existed.

Accordingly, the term Potemkin village is applied to suggest a scam portraying a negative reality with a false positive appearance. This term immediately came to mind as President Joe Biden started the new year with a visit this past weekend to our southern border. However, what he was shown would have made Potemkin proud.

Biden visited the city of El Paso, Texas, which has recently been in the news as victimized by massive illegal-immigrant flooding. As our southern border with Mexico has nine sectors of which one – the El Paso Sector – has experienced the most migrant encounters in FY 2023, Biden coming to El Paso suggested he sought the truth about the border.

But prior to Biden's visit, city officials had dismantled numerous homeless migrant encampments. Despite the hardships El Paso residents have been suffering from these floods of humanity, it was unsurprising to see the city's Democratic mayor, Oscar Leeser, try to create a less chaotic environment for Biden to view by removing the encampments.

Additionally, only days earlier, the Texas National Guard had installed two miles of fencing, serving as a barricade into the city, resulting in a drastic decrease in human flooding. Too bad Biden was not given a photograph of El Paso taken before his arrival.

Last month, Leeser walked away from a press conference with mic in hand when he was pressed on why he refused to declare a state of emergency due to the flooding. Undoubtedly, there was a quid pro quo involved as $6 million in federal funding had been promised to the city to handle a migrant problem the White House denies exists.

Leeser's political career as a Democrat benefits by not criticizing Biden's border policy. Such a position is ironic, however, as Leeser has transported twice as many illegals to New York City as his Republican governor, Greg Abbott, has. Interestingly, as Abbott's vocal criticism of the border situation created by Biden's incompetence has been loud and clear, for Leeser it is "mum's the word."

Abbott wasted no time in continuing his criticism as he met Biden upon his arrival in Texas. The governor hand-delivered a letter to him that cut to the chase.

It began, "Your visit to our southern border with Mexico today is $20 billion too little and two years too late."

He added the pointlessness of a visit that "avoids the sites where mass illegal immigration occurs," visiting a city that "has been sanitized of the migrant camps which had overrun downtown El Paso because your Administration wants to shield you from the chaos that Texans experience on a daily basis."

The letter went on to call for Biden to undertake a serious effort to secure the border, including to "stop sandbagging the implementation of the Remain-in-Mexico policy …, aggressively prosecute illegal entry between ports of entry, and allow ICE to remove illegal immigrants in accordance with existing federal laws," and "immediately resume construction of the border wall."

What perhaps is most telling about Biden's border visit is that it was made 22 months after the appointment of a border czar to determine the root causes of the situation there – Vice President Kamala Harris – who has yet to provide us with even a cursory report of her findings.

In April of 2021, she sought to justify her lack of progress on the issue, explaining it was "complex." However, by May of 2022, she was accused of simply abandoning the issue on her own, failing even to host an immigration event for the nine previous months.

When Arizona Sheriff Mark Lamb heard about Biden making a border visit, he suggested the president kick it off with an apology to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for falsely accusing mounted agents last year of horse whipping illegals. No such apology was given by Biden, whom Lamb criticizes for failing to cover agents' backs.

Rarely has the CBP been so challenged as it is today and more deserving of presidential support – which it is not receiving. Such lack of support is inexplicable absent a president's personal desire for an open border.

While Biden's border visit now allows him to counter critics on the issue, the Potemkin village he viewed in El Paso will allow him to downplay claims of massive illegal immigration.

However, one big difference exists between the 1787 Potemkin Village and that of 2023. Catherine the Great was totally unaware she was being deceived by what she saw; Biden knows otherwise.

Biden and the 'hypoChrisy' of Chris Hayes

Thu, 05 Jan 2023 05:08:27 GMT

BIDEN AND THE "HYPO CHRISY " OF CHRIS HAYES

James G. Zumwalt / January 4, 2023

World Net Daily ... Following the whopper of an effort by MSNBC television host Chris Hayes to distinguish one liar from another, modification of the word "hypocrisy" to the above spelling is warranted in his honor.

A recent flurry of criticism was triggered upon the discovery that Republican New York Rep.-elect George Santos had fabricated much of his background information. Santos initially pushed back on the criticism but eventually admitted to exaggerating things such as where he had gone to school, where he had worked and false claims about Jewish ancestry.

Santos apologized, attempting to dismiss what he did more as embellishment rather than lying. Even so, it has triggered a federal investigation into his finances.

Whether it was embellishment or lying, what Santos did was clearly wrong. However, what is disingenuous is the reaction of Democrats who mercilessly attack Santos for lies that pale in comparison to the whoppers that have poured out of Joe Biden's mouth during a political career spanning a half century and that continue on through today.

In fact, for those remembering the opening scene in the early 1970s television program "Kung Fu" in which a boyish David Carradine – called "Grasshopper" – is shown learning martial arts by a master, when it comes to lying, Santos is the grasshopper to Master Biden.

Biden has displayed zero concern for those impacted by his lies. One of his earliest occurred after he was first elected to the Senate in 1972 but before taking office. His wife at the time, Neilia, and three children (Beau, Hunter and baby daughter Naomi) were involved in a car accident that claimed the lives of Neilia and Naomi.

Despite the fact Neilia apparently had caused the accident and the truck driver, Curtis Dunn, heroically acted to save the car's occupants, for decades afterward Biden erroneously suggested Dunn had been drinking. While Biden sought to curry sympathy for himself with this tale, his failure to ever apologize for it left the Dunn family devastated after their father's 1999 death.

Biden became such a proficient liar he really seemed to believe he could get away with it. Yet, even after learning he could not, he continued to try. The plagiarism he committed in law school failed to discourage his later plagiarism as a senator in using others' speeches as his own.

He took this to the extreme of even using the original speaker's words to falsely make claims about his own life simply because those words appeared in the original text – words such as he was the first member of his family to go to college. (Biden lied as his grandfather had gone to college.)

Biden later had to drop out of his 1988 presidential campaign for lying about having graduated in the top half of his law school class when he really graduated 76 out of 85.

Now occupying the Oval Office and still undeterred about telling untruths, Biden can claim the title of Liar-in-Chief.

While some may choose to dismiss his lies as the result of an 80-year-old mind lacking clarity on issues, it ignores the fact he has followed this pattern since age 29.

But what is astounding is to hear Democratic voices rant against Santos that have been woefully silent about Biden. Nor, for that matter, did we hear those voices speak out about Sen. Elizabeth Warren's, D-Mass., false claim of Native American ancestry. The claim put her on an inside career track both to get a teaching opportunity and to run for the U.S. Senate.

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., calls Santos a "pathological liar who's defrauded the voters of New York state" adding, "he has lied systematically about nearly every aspect of his life."

If Santos fails to resign, Torres demands the House Ethics Committee investigate him. Torres claims – at least as far as being applicable to Republicans – "We have to send a clear message that if you defraud the voters you're going to be held accountable. You're going to be even prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

Left unanswered is why Santos should resign if no similar demand is made of Biden.

Fellow Democrat Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., went ballistic on Santos, claiming his lies are "just the lowest form of humanity."

Interestingly, both of the above Democrats chose to launch their attacks of Santos on liberal-friendly television programs ("The Reid Out" and "Morning Joe"), undoubtedly taking comfort in knowing no comparisons of Santos to Biden would be made.

Additionally, one of the newspapers that rushed to demonize Santos was the New York Times, which refused such a rush in the case of Hunter Biden – taking 18 months to finally report that his indciting laptop is real.

But perhaps the most outrageous position taken by a liberal host trying to defend the president by distinguishing a lying Biden from a lying Santos was by Hayes, speaking from his platform of "All in with Chris Hayes."

The see/speak/hear-no-evil-when-it-comes-to-Biden promoter endeavored to do so with a straight face, explaining a line exists between "normal" politicians lying and conmen serially lying. He does not get off to a very good start in his explanation by saying, "It would have been quite a big deal if Joe Biden had a law degree," when Biden, in fact, has one.

Hayes' suggestion that whatever lies Biden tells are the "normal" ones of which all politicians are guilty is fatuous pettifoggery.

For the lies Biden has told over the years are much more profound, going to the core of his character. They demonstrate he is a man of zero integrity.

There is a very obvious distinction that separates Santos and Biden when it comes to their character – one Hayes and the others completely ignore.

While Santos has acknowledged his untruthfulness, Biden – for over five decades – has never done so. Biden's lies about Dunn, especially after the truck driver had attempted to save the Neilia's life, is what is most telling about Biden's total lack of character.

The legislative game politicians play

Sat, 31 Dec 2022 20:08:59 GMT

THE LEGISLATIVE GAMES POLITICIANS PLAY

James G. Zumwalt / December 30, 2022

World Net Daily ... When it comes to legislation, our politicians engage in the "smokescreen game."

In combat, smokescreens are tactically used to hide troop movements or locations by hindering an enemy's view of the battlefield. The tactic has not gone unnoticed by members of Congress using a similar ploy to pass legislation. Three aspects are involved in how politicians play this game to hide some contents of a bill. The first deals with title selection by a bill's sponsors.

Depending on intent, sponsors either exercise integrity, giving their bill a title honestly representing its contents or, exhibiting less integrity, giving it a misleading title as it includes a lot more funding for other, less popular projects as well. A recent example of this was the "Inflation Reduction Act of 2022."

Sounding like legislation primarily designed to address a major problem on the minds of most voters – our economy – it is now recognized as "the most significant climate legislation in U.S. history," primarily designed to "finance green power, lower costs through tax credits, reduce emissions, and advance environmental justice."

Politicians also engage in such gamesmanship when a bill carries a title sponsors selected that is representative of the content, but opponents then seek to poison the legislation by virtue of referencing it with an unrepresentative and unfair title.

Nowhere was this tactic more obvious than earlier this year when Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida sought to pass the "Parental Choice in Education Act." The legislation simply sought to ban the teaching of sexually mature subjects to students in grades kindergarten through third and mandate teachers alert parents upon learning a student is pregnant or seeking gender change.

Democrats unsuccessfully sought to undermine this legislation by erroneously referring to it as the "Don't Say Gay Bill," although it contained no such wording.

Then there are bills named but which in no way identify their primary focus simply because they consist of a smorgasbord of various unrelated measures for various unrelated topics. They become a major conduit for a range of earmarks. Such was the recently passed $1.85 trillion omnibus bill that will fund the U.S. government through the end of September 2023.

While the omnibus bill earmarks totalled $15 billion, legislators also gave themselves a sizable pay raise. On the ridiculous side, although funding for Customs and Border Patrol was provided, such funds were excluded from being used to improve border security.

The hypocrisy of this was evidenced by the bill also containing border security improvement funding for Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia and Oman to the tune of $410 million.

The smorgasbord also contained $1,438,000,000 for membership in global multilateral organizations, including the U.N. Other funded projects , tending to suggest money grows on trees, was the naming of a federal building for soon-to-no-longer-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and $3.6 million for the "Michelle Obama Trail."

At a time our economy is in turmoil with people living paycheck-to-paycheck, leadership by example should have had Pelosi and Michelle Obama pressing to forgo such projects.

The second aspect of smokescreen gaming involves politicians hiding their spending sprees within lengthy bills. The longer a bill is, the less likely there will be time to scour it for waste.

The longest bill ever passed by Congress was the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, signed into law by President Donald Trump on Dec. 27, 2020. Logging in at 5,593 pages, it is doubtful its contents were fully understood by all voting on it.

Concerning this year's omnibus bill, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., underscored its ridiculous length by hauling out the 4,100-plus page document on a cart.

The length of some bills perhaps lends better understanding to Pelosi's comment during a 2010 press conference concerning the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"). While only 2,700 pages long , the stack of rules, restrictions and proposed regulations added almost 17,000 additional pages to it.

When queried about Obamacare, Pelosi said , "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy." In an ideal world, that "fog of controversy" should be non-existent before receiving a congressional vote.

The third aspect of the smokescreen involves the attachment of very short fuses to vote on bills. Such may be necessary for a valid reason, such as a new Congress soon to be seated or some other impending event. But short fuses are attached too simply to ram bills through Congress before the opposition can organize to challenge them.

This tactic was used by Pelosi to get House approval on an omnibus bill earlier this year.

A video of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., detailed just how such a corrupt tactic was used by Pelosi for the bill as Republicans were never shown its contents. Not until after midnight on March 10, Greene explains, did the Democrat-controlled Rules Committee post an alert on their website, failing even to email notice to Republicans, that a debate would begin less than two hours later.

This allowed Democrats to convene the committee in the dark of the night, at 1:30 a.m., passing it by 2:30 a.m., before Republican representatives had even awakened that morning.

Greene laments that this is not how Congress should be run – i.e., in a way failing to allow every member to discuss a bill, make amendments or changes, etc. She claims "Congress is broken. … This is how corrupt it is. It is so corrupt, it is shocking," concluding that Democrats obviously wanted to get the bill through without being stopped.

Sadly, passing legislation in Congress has evolved into a game of partisan politics by which the chiseling of legislation through challenging debate to hone it into a most effective state for all is disallowed. Accordingly, voters are the real losers.

Biden and Fetterman have their cake and 'Edith' too

Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:04:14 GMT

BIDEN AND FETTERMAN HAVE THEIR CAKE AND "EDITH" TOO

James G. Zumwalt / December 28, 2022

World Net Daily ... In 16th century England, the proverb "You can't have your cake and eat it too" became popular, quoted when two conflicting options existed. As such, both could not be chosen as choosing to eat the cake left no more to have. President Joe Biden and now Pennsylvania Sen.-elect John Fetterman enjoy a variation of this proverb.

For two years, Biden's deteriorating mental health has been of grave concern. And Fetterman, whose mental abilities, after a May 2022 stroke , to deal with serious issues of his office are questionable, will generate similar concerns once he is sworn in on Jan. 3.

Just like military recruits are expected to meet certain physical and mental standards, we expect the same of candidates running for high political office. Particularly when the office involved is the highest in the country, we want the occupant to at least be mentally, if not physically, qualified to govern.

Unfortunately for American voters, it was not until after the 2020 presidential election that Biden's mental acuity really became questionable. It is evidenced by a track record of misnaming countries, claiming there are 54 states in the U.S., failing to remember where his son died, calling his vice president "president," uttering word salads, getting lost at events, etc.

While Biden has his "cake" – having won the Oval Office – voters had every expectation he would perform the duties demanded.

But the Joe Biden who served in public office for 44 years (1973-2017) and campaigned for the presidency as a moderate is not the same Joe Biden now occupying the Oval Office. The mentally challenged president has become a socialist puppet, manipulated by puppeteers. But who is pulling the strings?

To address this, some American history is important.

In October 1919, President Woodrow Wilson suffered a serious stroke that left him incapacitated and permanently paralyzed on his left side. Bedridden for two months, only his wife, Edith, his doctors and close associates had contact with him.

Due to Wilson's mental deterioration and diminished memory and at Edith's insistence , the White House doctor would not sign an official letter of disability to present to the Cabinet. It also was recommended his condition not be made public.

Edith assumed many of her husband's presidential responsibilities for the remaining 15 months, including decision-making on various important matters of state.

Leaving office in January 1921, Wilson died three years later from the effects of his stroke. Only later was Edith's pivotal role as "acting president" revealed. She acknowledged it was necessary so as to keep the government running as smoothly as possible.

While Biden's policy puppeteer is not Jill, someone close to him has become his "Edith." Who is it?

It cannot be denied that former President Barack Obama wields considerable influence over Biden. Last April, when asked how involved Obama was with the current administration, then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said that the two "remain close friends and they talk regularly."

Biden also admits it was Obama's advice that resulted in his selection of Kamala Harris as his running mate.

Obama gave a very positive endorsement of Harris when her selection was announced, claiming she "is more than prepared for the job" and that it was "a good day for our country." We will never know whether Obama really meant what he said or recognized he could easily manipulate not only Biden but also Harris who conceivably could be filling Biden's shoes, either sooner or later.

Obama's Harris endorsement was way off target as today she is considered the most unpopular vice president in 50 years. But so influential is Obama over Biden that it has been said the latter is delivering the former's third term.

What also is interesting is Biden's vacations to his Delaware homes, where he can freely meet with people privately. Even Biden-friendly CNN noted during his first 276 days in office, almost 40% of that time was spent vacationing or teleworking from Camp David or Delaware. No record of visiting guests is publicly available; thus, we know nothing about possible influencers he meets there.

Those refusing to acknowledge a "different" Biden of today need to reflect upon his praise for former KKK member and Sen. Robert Byrd at his 2010 funeral. Biden honored Byrd as an influencer saying , "To me … for a lot of us, he was a mentor and a friend, and for a lot of us, he was a guide." This is quite a contrast to where his influencers have positioned him today.

Fetterman is now enjoying his cake – courtesy of a surprising Senate seat win – raising the question who then will be his "Edith." Undoubtedly, his wife, Gisele Barreto, will wield influence. A Brazilian-American activist whose family immigrated legally to the U.S, Gisele became a U.S. citizen in 2009. She also has a lust for power.

When Fetterman – serving as mayor of Braddock in 2018 – was elected as Pennsylvania's next lieutenant governor, he pressured its city council to appoint Gisele to replace him. He was unhappy when it recognized the impropriety of doing so, rejecting his proposal.

It is inconceivable, had President Wilson run for a third term in 1920, the American public would have voted him back into office due to disabilities that would have been more obvious by then, especially at a time America was trying to recover from World War I.

It is shocking that Pennsylvania voters, knowing of Fetterman's disabilities, nevertheless voted him into the Senate at a time so much chaos is ongoing both domestically and globally.

Ever since 1837, House members have not been allowed to wear hats on the floor. But, in 2019, before newly-elected Rep. Ilhan Omar took office, to accommodate the headscarf-wearing Muslim, a change to House rules was passed by her fellow Democrats.

With Fetterman now entering office, will we see the Senate rules suddenly modified to allow him to wear his signature hoodie.

Democrats have made it very clear that when it comes to their elected officials, they're going to have their cake and "Edith" too.

Christmas stories from snowflake land

Thu, 22 Dec 2022 21:58:56 GMT

CHRISTMAS STORIES FROM SNOWFLAKE LAND

James G. Zumwalt / December 22, 2022

World Net Daily ... With the holidays approaching, the poem "Twas the Night Before Christmas" reminds us that children are "nestled all snug in their beds" with "visions of sugar-plums" dancing in their heads. For many of these children living in northern climates, they also enjoy visions of snow falling to create the winter wonderland so typical of the Christmas holidays.

Unfortunately, children in southern climates, also nestled snug in their beds, while denied a similar winter wonderland, still seem able to share the "snowflake" experience. However, it comes in the form of those social "snowflakes" of the woke generation that Christmas seems to bring out.

An example of this recently occurred in Eureka Springs, Arkansas. Christmas provided a trigger for snowflake liberals attempting to erase the special holiday's "raison d'etre." Beginning in 1950, the Beta Sigma Phi sorority has set up a display of the Nativity scene, more recently turning responsibility for it over to a group known as "The Great Passion Play."

No sooner had the display gone up this November than the town's mayor, Butch Berry, requested it be removed. Berry apparently had been threatened by some seasonal snowflakes, that if it were not taken down, they would file a lawsuit to force its removal. Hoping to spare the town legal fees, Berry made his request.

But the Passion Play group was unwilling to roll over. Its executive director, Randall Christy, denied Berry's request, posting notices on Facebook about what was going on, prompting thousands of townspeople to come out to support the display.

The mayor finally gave in, agreeing to issue Christy a permit and declaring others wishing to put up similar displays in the public park alongside the Nativity scene would receive permits to do so as well. Christy announced the town would "keep Christ in Christmas," preventing the town's snowflakes from playing a role as the Grinch who stole the Nativity scene.

Sadly these snowflakes reside across the country. In 2021, Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where President Joe Biden has a vacation home, was involved in a lawsuit. The Catholic Church there had a Nativity scene that offended a Grinch who sought its removal. The case was eventually settled by the city having to ban unattended Nativity scenes on public property.

This year, the library director in the town of Dedham, Massachusetts, sought to play Scrooge, announcing she was terminating the long standing tradition of putting up Christmas trees in the public libraries because they made some people feel "uncomfortable."

Protests against the policy reached Jesse Waters of Fox News who shared the story on his "Primetime" show. Threatening to pay a visit to Dedham proved sufficient enough to get the director's decision reversed.

While the library director later posted on Facebook that "we do our best to respect the wide variety of viewpoints and beliefs in our community…," Waters noted tongue-in-cheek that for some people, "there's nothing more offensive than twinkling lights on a Douglas fir. … How offensive."

Waters added, after learning the libraries had earlier commemorated Kwanzaa, "So, you can celebrate Kwanzaa at the library, but you can't celebrate Christmas? Does anybody in Dedham, Massachusetts, even celebrate Kwanzaa?"

While snowflakes, Grinches and Scrooges all lost out in the above stories, apparently in Woodland, Washington, a Nativity scene in a park had to be removed after city officials said they received complaints about the display being erected on public land. Sadly, the loud complaints of the few took priority over the silent enjoyment by the many.

COVID lockdowns have left snowflakes with way, way too much time to reflect upon what they find socially disturbing. What will they decide to go after next?

If they are disturbed by Nativity scenes marking the birth of Christ, totally ignoring the Christmas holiday's raison d'etre, then what about Easter? Will we next hear complaints it should be abandoned as they are disturbed by the "chicken genocide" committed as millions of eggs are hard-boiled and hidden for children to find in commemoration of another important religious holiday?

Only time will tell us what these snowflakes will be disturbed by next!

Checkmating terrorists' past and future moves

Wed, 21 Dec 2022 14:37:07 GMT

CHECKMATING TERRORISTS' PAST AND FUTURE MOVES

James G. Zumwalt / December 21, 2022

World Net Daily ... Terrorists are slowly learning they eventually will be held accountable for their violent actions. Ass efforts are dedicated to ensuring this end, efforts are also being made to counter attacks the next generation of terrorists may be considering.

On Sept. 5, 1972, with the summer Olympics underway in Munich, Germany, eight Palestinian terrorists broke into the Olympic Village, kidnapping 11 Israeli athletes and coaches. The terrorists killed two captives immediately. They used the others as hostages to make their way to the airport, attempting to negotiate the release of over 200 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and make their escape.

A botched rescue operation by West German police resulted in all the hostages being killed as well as five of the terrorists.While the surviving three were arrested, their release was negotiated the following month after a Lufthansa flight was hijacked by other Palestinian terrorists. Israel immediately launched "

Operation "Wrath of God " by which its intelligence organization, Mossad, tracked down and eliminated, one-by-one, not only the three Munich terrorists but others in the terrorist group's leadership who were directly or indirectly involved in the attack. The operation lasted two decades but completed its mission successfully.

On Dec. 21, 1988, minutes after Pan Am Flight 103, with 259 people onboard, took off from London to New York, an explosion occurred under its left wing, causing it to crash. Since the bomb was detonated while over Lockerbie, Scotland, investigators were able to collect invaluable evidence that would have otherwise been lost over the ocean, enabling them to link the bombing to Libya.

Three Libyans eventually were determined to be responsible for the attack. Two of them were intelligence officers Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi and Lamen Khalifa Fhimah who were believed to have planted the explosive device on board the aircraft. Although their extradition was demanded, Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi refused to turn them over for prosecution

Finally, in 1999, Gadhafi agreed to do so as long as adjudication was by a panel of Spanish judges sitting in the Netherlands. Al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001, receiving a life sentence, while Fhimah was found not guilty.

Al-Megrahi was later shown a level of compassion he had denied the 270 people killed in Lockerbie (11 people on the ground died plus the 259 on the plane), as he was released in 2009 after receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis. He died in Libya three years later.

The third Libyan involved in the bombing remained a mystery for many years before finally being identified in 2017 as the bomb-maker. Abu Agila Mohammad Mas'ud Kheir Al-Marimi admitted his involvement to Libyan law enforcement. He allegedly served as a longtime operative for Libyan intelligence, building explosive devices from 1973-2011.

He is accused of providing the luggage containing the Lockerbie bomb to his co-conspirator(s), arming it just before it began its transit. He was finally indicted by outgoing U.S. Attorney General William Barr in 2020 for the Lockerbie bombing as well as for a number of other bombing plots.

Last week, al-Marimi, 71, was taken into U.S. custody , becoming the most recent terrorist to learn that violent actions have consequences. Those committing terrorist acts are learning they will be pursued relentlessly to be brought to justice.

Details remain sketchy on how al-Marimi was extradited, but there are indications he was forcibly removed from the safety of his home in Tripoli by unidentified armed kidnappers.

Regardless, the families of Pan Am 103 victims undoubtedly are pleased to know, after 34 years, the bomb-maker is finally being brought to justice.

Occasionally out of great tragedy, good occurs. Such has been the case in the aftermath of the Lockerbie bombing.

As 190 of Lockerbie's victims were Americans, many of whom were college students, Congress held hearings to determine what went wrong. Among those called to testify was one of Israel's leading aviation security experts, Arik Arad, who gave details on what security gaps were left open.

Arad testified before both the House Public Works and Transportation Subcommittee on Aviation and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He did so with impressive credentials, having designed security for Israel's El Al Airlines as well as its shopping centers. A great testimonial to his security expertise is that there has yet to be a successful penetration of any security system he has designed.

Arad's testimony – and later engagement by a major U.S. airlines to design its security system – made passenger aviation safer in a post-Lockerbie world. But as one seeking to stay ahead of the next terrorist threat, today Arad has identified what that threat is and is taking steps to counter it.

His newly formed company, Cyviation Aero, is focusing on a threat that potentially could bring the commercial aviation industry to a standstill. It is the threat posed by terrorists successfully hacking into airborne aircraft to achieve bombless aviation disasters.

As in the past, Arad is taking a proactive approach to design defensive security solutions against cybersecurity attacks that even the terrorist has yet to formulate.

We live in a world where both good and evil reign. As terrorists like al-Marimi represent the latter, endeavoring to make it less safe for commercial air travelers, it is good to know we have counter-terrorist experts like Arad representing the former, endeavoring to stop al-Marimi's ilk by checkmating the terrorist's latest threat.

Denigrating America gets Griner a 'Get out of Russia free' card

Thu, 15 Dec 2022 01:20:30 GMT

DENIGRATING AMERICA GETS GRINER A "GET OUT OF RUSSIA FREE" CARD

James G. Zumwalt / December 14, 2022

World Net Daily ... As news broke Dec. 9 that WNBA basketball player Brittney Griner landed in the U.S. following her Russian ordeal of getting caught with drugs, tried, convicted and sentenced to serve nine years, memories of the 1973 return home of then-Navy Lt. John McCain, a Vietnam War POW, were replayed.

Shot down in October 1967, McCain ejected from his aircraft, shattering his leg and both arms. Less than a year later, his father became commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific. The North Vietnamese saw a propaganda opportunity – releasing McCain early to demoralize the other POWs.

However, McCain refused to be a party to the ploy unless all POWs captured before him were also released. That did not happen, and his captors, denied their propaganda opportunity, increased his beatings, eventually forcing a broken McCain to sign a war crimes confession. After five and a half years, McCain returned home with all his fellow prisoners – a courageous hero.

Didl Griner gave a thought to other American prisoners held in Russia who remained behind, receiving no priority consideration?

Ironically, Griner, prior to her ill-fated Russia trip, played on basketball courts in the U.S. where she dishonored our country (in 2020) following the death of George Floyd during an arrest. She announced the national anthem should not be played before WNBA games and, if played, she would await its final note before taking to the court.

Of course, Griner was unwilling to take her dissension to the point of not playing basketball as such would cause her financial hardship.

Unlike McCain, whose early-release refusal caused him additional beatings, Griner would not even suffer a paycheck hit. As such, she represents the worst kind of social activist – one unhesitatingly willing to disrespect her country as long as it costs her nothing.

Griner was in Russia to supplement her WNBA income, playing for an elite basketball club team in Ekaterinburg. If the Russian anthem were to be played there, it would be unsurprising to see Griner stand for it. However, she was detained in Moscow en route for having cannabis vape oil in her possession.

Several disturbing issues arise concerning Griner's release:

1. Griner's imprisonment was the result of nobody's actions but her own. Yet, having spent only a few months in prison, she was exchanged for a Russian prisoner in the U.S. whose services Moscow badly needs. Unbelievably, Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout, imprisoned since 2011, was the subject of Griner's one-for-one exchange...

...It is difficult to believe a prisoner Russia so badly needed was surrendered for one we don't need – a prisoner disrespectful of the country that negotiated her freedom.

Conservative actor Kevin Sorbo, 64, recognizes Bout is a dangerous man whose return to freedom will put the "Merchant of Death," as he is known, right back into an arms trade business that will claim an unknown number of lives. Consequently, Sorbo said he does not "want to hear" any more about gun control from Biden after only contributing to the problem.

In an exchange for a major Russian asset like Bout, we should have also negotiated Paul Whelan's return – imprisoned in a Russian labor camp for four years (out of a 16-year sentence) on trumped-up espionage charges. Whelan, 52, warranted a priority exchange, not only based on time served but also, unlike Griner, he did nothing illegal.

Additionally, he had served his country in the Marine Corps, although it ended in a punitive discharge.

Clearly, with Griner's high WNBA profile, Biden saw a much greater bang for his leftist base buck by negotiating her release. He even took time to assure Griner's spouse he was committed to her release while dodging requests from Whelan's wife for meetings.

This non-action is particularly disturbing to those of us who, like Whelan, have served in uniform, as it comes from a commander in chief who dodged military service five times during the Vietnam War.

Undoubtedly, had Whelan, who is white, been released before Griner, we would have heard a great deal from the liberal racist chorus. However, giving Griner a priority release left that chorus silent.

Meanwhile, even the Russian media mocks the U.S. for relative values of the heavily one-sided prisoner exchange favoring Moscow as the White House ludicrously claims that Griner is an "inspiration" to women and LGBTQ Americans. Other than working for a living by playing professional basketball, it is difficult to understand the rationale.

2. The timing of Griner's release is interesting.

A lawsuit against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) for the killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi was dismissed by a federal court judge on Dec. 6 at the behest of the Biden administration. MbS became a critical player in the negotiations with Russia on behalf of the U.S. Thus, Biden sacrificed more for Griner's release than appeared at first blush.

3. The lopsided outrageousness of this exchange, not only Bout's release but also relinquishing accountability for MbS, sets a very bad precedent for other Americans who, in the future, might find themselves imprisoned, rightfully or wrongfully, in hostile nations.

4. Upon her release, Griner was privately flown from Moscow to Abu Dhabi, where the prisoner swap was effected on the tarmac. From there, she was flown to Kelly AFB in San Antonio, Texas, where she was physically examined at a military hospital. Griner received all the benefits of a hero's welcome – not bad for an ingrate who denigrated her country.

And, in an interesting side note, for a Biden administration so concerned about climate change, such long private flights do nothing to help the environment while costing taxpayers thousands of dollars.

It will be interesting to see whether ingrate Griner ever appreciates all that was done, at great national expense financially as well as setting a dangerous foreign policy precedent, to bring her home ahead of others.

Griner got a "get out of Russian jail free" card played on her behalf. The honorable thing for her now would be not to let Whelan be forgotten and to stand for our national anthem. Sadly, don't expect that to happen.

Is Hunter Biden 'Smarter Than a 5th Grader?'

Sat, 10 Dec 2022 11:49:45 GMT

IS HUNTER BIDEN "SMARTER THAN A 5TH-GRADER?"

James G. Zumwalt / December 9, 2022

World Net Daily ... The nonprofit research group Marco Polo, established to expose corruption and blackmail, completed a 13-month investigation into the contents of the " laptop from hell" – the computer Hunter Biden abandoned at a repair shop.

Marco Polo published a 630-page report of its findings. The report reveals two important points about President Joe Biden and his family – one directly, the other indirectly.

Directly, it documents 459 alleged legal violations the Bidens and their business associates committed. Indirectly, with such incriminating evidence on a computer carelessly forgotten at a repair shop by Hunter, one wonders about Joe's personal assessment of his son, given in 2020, that "He's the smartest man I know."

With such a treasure trove of evidence, available to law enforcement in one "package" indicating Biden family criminality, is Hunter – as per the title of the 2007 game show – really any "smarter than a 5th grader?"

Hunter's brilliance is further evident in his emails, cleverly disguising reference to his father – codenamed "the Big Guy." Undoubtedly, anyone coming across this reference spent months trying to figure out to whom it applied!

Marco Polo is led by former Trump White House official Garrett Ziegler. While the number of crimes alleged – almost a crime committed daily – may seem exorbitant, the supporting 2,020 citations lend them credibility.

With a Republican majority taking over the House and the current "see-no-evil-by-fellow-Democrats" majority about to surrender control, the next two years will prove interesting.

Numerous investigations are about to be launched, with Hunter at the top of the list. The noose around Hunter's neck to hold him accountable for his actions is tightening, leaving his supporters continually withdrawing into smaller and smaller and smaller rings of defensible positions.

As Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, reports : "First, it wasn't Hunter's laptop. Then they admitted it was his laptop, but argued it was Russian disinformation. Then they admitted it wasn't disinfo, but assured us Joe Biden wasn't involved. Now , it looks like Joe was involved, but they're telling us he did nothing wrong."

Congressional Republicans, rightly frustrated by the lack of action of the current Democratic House majority or the FBI to bring Hunter to justice, have collected evidence on their own. We know the FBI made efforts to cover up Hunter's actions as a judge forced the agency to testify concerning its collusion with social media in quashing the laptop story.

It turns out the FBI was meeting weekly with Biden campaign officials before the 2020 presidential election concerning the topic.

So far, there are indications the Republicans have evidence of wire fraud, FARA violations, money laundering and tax evasion. Their investigation will also focus on the extent of Joe's involvement with Hunter's business dealings.

With China alone, Hunter apparently played "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" with five separate deals winning the family 30 times more than that amount with parties related to that country's spy apparatus looking for an "elite capture" opportunity. For Hunter's meetings in China, it is telling that approval was granted at the highest level of government.

The laptop reveals too that at least one member of Biden's administration, John Nevergole, who currently serves on the Advisory Council on Doing Business in Africa (PAC-DBIA), was a Biden family business partner in Western Africa before joining.

Interestingly, only weeks after Twitter was purchased, Joe suggested Elon Musk's foreign investors be investigated as a potential national security threat, possibly influencing censorship and misinformation.

This from a man who not only saw his son's business dealings as no threat but from a man whose administration worked with the American social media to censor conservative voices and publish misinformation.

Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., says linkage is supported by "evidence that the finances, credit cards and bank accounts of Hunter and Joe Biden were co-mingled, if not shared.

And on some accounts at least, red flags were raised by banks to the account owner or owners indicating suspicious or illegal activity. Of question too are numerous occasions that Hunter's business associates met with Joe when he was vice president." Comer added that the Bidens "flourished and became millionaires by simply offering access to the family."

While access was the "gold" that Hunter peddled, the Bidens failed to register as lobbyists, as the law requires, claiming they were not so involved and, thus, not lobbyists.

Additionally, as former CIA agent Sam Faddis shares , the recent release of the Twitter files, revealing efforts to hide Hunter's corruption, is more telling than it appears.

It is telling about congressional Democrats refusing to acknowledge the truth; it is telling about the media unwilling to do its due diligence; it is telling about FBI leadership conspiring with social media to kill the story; and it is telling about 51 members of the intelligence community who falsely told us it was Russian disinformation.

In burying this story, all these sources ran cover for Chinese intelligence.

Even as Hunter takes on the honest profession of painter, experts say the hundreds of thousands of dollars he gets for his artwork is ridiculous. In reality, he sells the family name .

A former Hunter business associate, Tony Bobulinski, has already provided documentation supporting the above. He says he looks forward to other witnesses being interviewed during the upcoming investigation to support what he has reported.

Evidence also suggests, choosing between money and the Biden legacy, Hunter clearly opted for the former. He apparently admitted at one point he was willing to put that legacy on the line if it meant securing a deal with the Chinese Communist Party. A federal investigation of Hunter was triggered, in part, due to such suspicious activity regarding foreign transactions being reported.

Despite the range of criminal activity in which Hunter seems to have been involved, Joe remains "proud" of him – perhaps because money continued pouring into the family coffers.

When queried about Republicans launching a Hunter investigation, Joe arrogantly replied, "Lots of luck," perhaps dismissing any Biden accountability emboldened by the way Hillary Clinton has escaped accountability to date. He might want to know a pre-midterm election poll revealed, out of a pool of 1,000 people, two-thirds favored undertaking a Hunter investigation.

If one checks the internet, numerous stories exist about parents turning a son into police after learning he committed a crime. That is "tough love." Joe was never willing to do that with Hunter. His incompetence as a parent has done to Hunter what his incompetence as president has done to our country.

Joe was an enabler, even giving Hunter money to pay his hookers despite his raking in millions of dollars from foreign sources.

Should charges be brought against Hunter and he be found guilty, two questions arise:

1. Hunter recently petitioned to get child support lowered for the illegitimate child he fathered, pleading lack of income. So, how will he pay for his legal defense? Chances are Biden supporters will step up to the plate to financially assist the ne'er do well as his "sugar" brother did earlier this year, paying $2 million in back taxes for him.

2. If convicted, will father Joe pardon him before leaving office?

For too long, Hunter has served as the poster child of non-accountability for unscrupulous behavior. It is time that not only he pay the piper for such behavior but all those who supported and benefited from his activities as well.

Hunter's party may be over and he has no one to blame but the "smartest man" Joe Biden knows.

The White House's 'rigged' press conferences

Fri, 02 Dec 2022 01:48:54 GMT

THE WHITE HOUSE'S "RIGGED" PRESS CONFERENCES

James G. Zumwalt / December 1, 2022

World Net Daily ... Imagine daily White House press conferences beginning with lights dimming, a disco ball dropping from the ceiling and members of the presidential staff on stage providing synchronized dancing behind Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre as she prepares to take reporters' questions.

This visual is triggered from an op-ed by a reporter who regularly attends these pressers.

But after President Joe Biden's first post-midterm election conference, the reporter was so incensed, he felt compelled to share that these conferences are clearly choreographed.

Today News Africa correspondent Simon Ateba reports that this "rigged" process gives the appearance of a free-wheeling question and answer session, but in reality, it is not. He explains:

..."Many things at the White House are rigged, especially press briefings or press conferences. Questions are often sent in advance by the same reporters who get called on all the time. The President, the Press Secretary, then reads prepared answers from a binder or a notebook with talking points...

..."For the people watching at home, it all appears normal, reporters asking questions and getting answers. In reality, it's a show, a sham, the appearance of normality.

In a way, that's how the White House operates. It's not about reality, but the appearance of reality.

It's not about transparency, but the appearance of transparency. It's also not about press freedom, but the appearance of press freedom. Appearance at the White House is reality."

Ateba further opined...

"… President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is turning 80 years old this month [on Nov. 20], held such a sham press conference at the State Dining Room in the White House, the day after his party showed surprising strength at the polls despite rising inflation, skyrocketing crime and widening divisions across the nation...

'I've been given a list of 10 people that I'm supposed to call on. And you're all supposed to ask me one question, but I'm sure you'll ask me more,' President Biden told a room full of local and international journalists."

Ateba's frustration was warranted as his name was not on the list of 10, and no free-wheeling exchange occurred. But most telling is how his own perception of racism in the U.S. has changed...

..."When I first arrived in the United States, having watched CNN for years, I came to believe that the racists and the bad guys in the United States were the Republicans, the old white guys with no college degrees who live in the Midwest...

...But in the Biden White House, as I have struggled to get access, ask questions and be treated with the same dignity as others, I realized that the Republicans were not the racists and the horrible, awful people I was told they were...

...The racist is not the Republican or the Democrat. The racist is not the conservative or the liberal. The racist is the person who believes that you are not worth it, that you do not deserve to be treated with the same dignity as others because of where you come from, what you look like, what your gender is, what your beliefs are or what you sound like...

...And the racist is not also white or black or brown. I have faced racism from at least one female black reporter in the briefing room at the White House."

When later pressed about their pressers and reporters' "qualifications" for making the pre-approved list given Biden, the White House refused to respond.

Ateba remained unwilling to let the issue go by simply writing a critical op-ed. Days later, at a Nov. 22 press conference, as reporters shouted questions at Jean-Pierre, he could be heard demanding that she call on more reporters.

The idiom, "There are none so blind as those who will not see," advises us, applied to the Biden administration's press conferences, to open our eyes as the only reality is the appearance of reality.

Joy Reid keeps the eternal white-blame flame burning

Thu, 01 Dec 2022 17:35:12 GMT

JOY REID KEEPS THE ETERNAL WHITE BLAME-FLAME BURNING

James G. Zumwalt / November 30, 2022

World Net Daily ... In July 2020, Joy Reid, who had been with MSNBC since 2011, became the first black woman to anchor a prime-time news show there. She explained then, "I feel the burden to do it right." However, doing it right involved taking just about any social issue and giving it an anti-white spin based on her outrageous racist perceptions.

It is unlikely in the history of prime-time news programming, any one host has continuously sought to spin the myth of a genetic white hatred existing toward minorities as has Reid.

Her most recent racist rant occurred just before Thanksgiving, calling the holiday "a simplistic interpretation … that erases the genocide that followed" – despite the Pilgrims having no slaves.

Obviously, in mentioning the "burden" she felt when she started her program in 2020, Reid failed to mention that another is to keep the flame of blame eternally burning in holding the sins of white forefathers against all future white generations.

Reid has become a blithering basket case, spouting victimization venom regularly against whites, undoubtedly inciting hatred among blacks unwilling to accept the fact all lives really do matter.

What David Duke represents to the radical right and the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), Reid represents to the radical left. She condemns all conservatives, lumping them in with such extremists by claiming, "It's the truth that Republicans want banned from our textbooks because here's the secret they want so desperately to keep: We are a country founded on violence."

Reid went on to claim that after the slaves were freed, "a terrorist organization that was a card-carrying member of polite society – the Ku Klux Klan – picked up where the Civil War ended using violence to maintain white supremacy."

But missing from the die-hard liberal's diatribe is any reference to the fact the KKK was not founded by Republicans but by Democrats seeking to prevent blacks from getting into Congress. Ironically, as Democrats supported the KKK, Republicans worked hard to elect those blacks running for office. In fact, the first 23 blacks elected to Congress were all Republicans.

Reid cited that the first ship coming to America with black slaves onboard arrived in 1619, marking the beginning of two and a half centuries of slavery in North America.

What she fails to share, however, is that the destination for those slaves originally was the Spanish colony of Veracruz and they were onboard a Portuguese ship. That ship was captured by British privateers who then took their slave cargo to Virginia to sell.

Liberal New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones used this incident to outrageously distort American history.

Despite its occurrence more than a century and a half before America's birth, she fostered the "1619 Project" to "rethink the United States origin story to explain how a country founded on ideals of freedom preserved the institution of slavery and the lasting legacy of it." In other words, she wants to blame America for slavery 157 years before the nation's establishment.

Hannah-Jones and Reid play two different ends of the blame game. The former seeks to blame America for the sins of white Englishmen while the latter seeks to blame all white Americans after 1776.

Just like it is not right for Hannah-Jones to blame non-existing white Americans in 1619, Reid has no right to blame 21st century generations of white Americans as having some kind of genetic defect that rejects equality for all.

Despite a Republican history comparatively free of racism, today's Democrats – aided by television hosts like Reid who fail to do their homework – perform a disservice, keeping the truth secret about one political party's racist links and another's fight to combat it.

2020 vote-fraud theory gets a boost

Thu, 24 Nov 2022 15:53:13 GMT

2020 VOTE-FRAUD THEORY GETS A BOOST

James G. Zumwalt / November 23, 2022

World Net Daily ... The 2020 U.S. presidential election had voters going to bed that evening believing President Donald Trump clearly had been reelected, only to learn the next morning that Joe Biden had mysteriously rallied.

Boatloads of ballots giving Biden a statistically questionable win found their way to voting centers, after voting monitors had been sent home for various reasons, such as busted water pipes, in the dead of night.

Efforts to contest the election results by analyzing what happened have been ridiculed by a liberal media or short-circuited by lawsuits seeking to financially drain the ability of concerned citizens to get at the truth.

One such effort has uncovered a disturbing truth that should concern us all, regardless of our political leanings. It generated allegations resulting in an arrest. And, lest liberals believe some conservative attorney general was playing politics, the reality is that the AG involved is a diehard liberal whose election was funded by billionaire "set-the-criminals-free" George Soros.

Catherine Engelbrecht gained the spotlight due to the documentary "2000 Mules," which used much of the evidence her nonprofit group "True the Vote" (TTV) had obtained to show 2020 voting irregularities. Engelbrecht teamed with election investigative analyst Gregg Phillips to collect a wealth of data questioning election integrity.

The mainstream media (MSM) accused them of promoting the "Big Lie" of election fraud.

But as their investigation continued, it caused them to focus on a small American software company operating in Michigan with 21 employees and in Australia with six. The company, Konnech Corp., had nothing to do with collecting, counting or reporting ballots in U.S. elections; it was involved in helping clients with basic election logistics, such as scheduling poll workers.

But its contract mandated all data was to be securely stored in the U.S. and only accessible to its citizens. Konnech denied storage occurred on Chinese servers, which later was found to be untruthful.

As information about Konnech began going public on the internet, the MSM immediately jumped in to defend it. They claimed Konnech's detractors were "using threadbare evidence, or none at all" to suggest it had secret ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) – to whom Konnech is alleged to have given backdoor access of personal data belonging to 2 million poll workers.

MSM attempted to undermine Engelbrecht and Phillips' credibility by dismissing them as election deniers, maligning them for citing the fact Konnech employees and its CEO, Eugene Yu, were Chinese. However, even Konnech's now-deleted website suggested a CCP connection based on many previous and numerous successful projects .

Yu had come to the U.S. in 1986, becoming an American citizen. He denied TTV's allegations which, the MSM proclaimed, forced him into hiding due to threatening emails he subsequently received.

Konnech filed a defamation lawsuit against TTV and obtained a temporary restraining order against it to stop making allegations the MSM deemed as "outrageous."

But the Konnech story was later updated by former CIA agent Sam Faddis of AND Magazine following Yu's arrest...

..."Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon, a far-left Soros -backed prosecutor , is working hard to downplay the significance of the arrest saying that his office's investigation was 'concerned solely with the personal identifying information of election workers.'

Still, the fact that Gascon's office, which works hard to look the other way whenever crimes are committed, made the arrest tells you something about the strength of the evidence against Yu and Konnech. Obviously the evidence was so overwhelming Gascon had no choice but to act."

Yet charges against Yu filed before midterm elections were mysteriously dropped right afterward.

Ironically, however, because TTV chose not to endanger a whistleblower reporting on Yu's activities by identifying the source when ordered by a court to do so, Engelbrecht and Phillips spent eight days in solitary confinement for their refusal to do so.

It is clear a government investigation now needs to be launched into Konnech's operations.

Was data about poll workers stored in China for easy access by the CCP? The best way to undermine a democracy is to destroy voter faith in free and independent elections. Konnech's questionable activities do this.

Sadly, once again, just like the MSM's denials that a laptop computer turned over to the FBI by a repair shop owner really belonged to Hunter Biden, claiming it was simply Russian disinformation, the MSM dismiss claims of possible election fraud by Konnech, even without making an effort to investigate what happened.

America is in dire straits today because a liberal ideology is given priority over reality. What TTV uncovered about Konnech demonstrates that serious flaws in our voting system, subject to manipulation by unfriendly nations, do exist. Unsurprisingly, it turns out Yu has also made donations to the Democratic Party.

But despite Konnech allegedly being behind the "largest data breach in United States history," our MSM today seem unconcerned, obviously poisoned by a liberal ideology blinding them to reality.

As the MSM tell us claims about voting fraud in the 2020 presidential election are outrageous, what is really outrageous is their straightforward dismissal of the claims.

Nancy Pelosi’s political obituary

Thu, 17 Nov 2022 01:32:07 GMT

NANCY PELOSI'S POLITICAL OBITUARY

James G. Zumwalt / November 16, 2022

World Net Daily ... With Republicans now officially able to claim control of the U.S. House of Representatives, having banked at least the 218 seats needed, we can finally write Nancy Pelosi's political obituary as her high profile tenure as speaker comes to an ignominious end.

No honest obituary should overlook what has happened in the San Francisco district Pelosi represents. Voters there have re-elected her 18 times, apparently uncaring about their city's gradual descent into the bowels of Hell by transitioning its streets into public bathrooms for the homeless.

What the homeless have done to the city, Pelosi, as speaker, has done to the country.

San Francisco's 12th District voters, represented by Pelosi, 82, for nearly 33 years , have aided and abetted the deterioration of their city. They have empowered her as speaker to wield destructive influence on a national level.

The first female speaker of the House (2007-2011), repeating as such later (2017-present), she was the highest ranking female elected official in history until Kamala Harris became vice president. With Republicans taking control of the House, her current tenure ends in January 2023.

Taking one's eye off the ball comes with a price. And Pelosi's obituary as speaker shows she took hers off the responsibility of representing the people who put her in office.

Tourism statistics reveal that San Francisco is no longer where one wishes to leave their heart. While the pandemic was a primary cause, most likely public defecation by the homeless and rising crime contributed. The former has become so bad that pedestrians obtain poop maps to avoid the human waste deposits.

In 2020, tourism was down 61% from a record high in 2019 while spending was down 77.7% – a loss of $2.3 billion in revenues.

San Francisco International Airport experienced a 71.4% downturn in traffic. Average hotel occupancy was 27.2%, down from 67.2%. Tourism likely will continue its decline unless officials address the alarming increase in crime. While robberies and rapes were down, homicides were up 37.9%, burglaries 42.3%, arson 53.4% and car theft 32.3%.

It should be no surprise that a liberal city like San Francisco embraced the "defund the police" movement, diverting $120 million from law enforcement over a two-year period. The money was redirected to fund initiatives for black Americans in the city.

It was intended as "a gesture of reparations for decades of city policymaking that have created or exacerbated deep inequities for San Francisco's African American residents." Officials rightfully forewarned that such defunding could cause officers to leave the profession, creating a shortage.

The following year the San Francisco mayor who defunded police made an emergency request to replace those funds to crack down on crime and hold criminals accountable for their acts.

She explained , "Our compassion cannot be mistaken for weakness or indifference."

Interestingly, Pelosi never tried to rein in Democrats pushing police defunding. It was only when polls before midterms showed popular support for police funding that Pelosi took a stand.

When asked for her response to the defunding encouraged by Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., Pelosi paid homage to Bush but not to police, saying, "With all due respect in the world for Cori Bush, that's not the position of the Democratic Party."

Across the nation, America has suffered the consequences of a speaker failing to derail the leftist push to defund police. More concerned about the political power of her party than for the lives of American citizens, there is an unknown body count of criminal victims for which Pelosi is responsible.

Ironically, her own husband's body was almost added to that count due to an attack by an illegal immigrant, were it not for the quick reacting police Democrats disdain.

In 2018, Pelosi's campaign for speaker was questionable since scores of Democrats were elected on an anti-Pelosi platform. But being the cutthroat politician she is, she was able to assemble enough votes while playing the gender card.

She pledged then to step down as speaker after the 117th Congress of 2021-2022, perhaps only because she recognized the historic trend of midterm elections changing House control.

However, last September she suggested otherwise when asked about another run for speaker saying she was "not making any comments until this election is finished."

Despite a lengthy political career that has made her a legend in her own mind, a number of her fellow Democrats will be happy to see her go. "Celebrated day trader" Pelosi was hammered recently by Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., for a "failure of House leadership" by not imposing a ban on stock trading by lawmakers.

While Pelosi assured her party they would retain the House, she recognized it was unlikely, evidenced by her private meeting with Biden to discuss becoming the U.S. ambassador to Italy should Republicans win control. This says a lot about her persona.

Although she could still remain in Congress after surrendering the speaker's gavel, that would put her on the same level with so many others over which she once ruled. Such a step down is not in her character.

Therefore, it would be surprising should she fail to accept the ambassadorship – a position Biden has left open for her. This is despite her recent assurance she will remain in Congress.

Perhaps one of the most effective teams of a speaker from one party and a president from another occurred when Ronald Reagan was president (1981-1989). The speaker was Rep. Tip O'Neill, D-Mass., who so served for 10 years (1977-1987).

While the two had their share of disagreements, it was their personal friendship that forged a sound working relationship in pursuit of the country's best interests – interests Pelosi as speaker failed to similarly pursue.

Unlike O'Neill's tenure as speaker, history will show that Pelosi never put the best interests of the country above her party. Her departure as speaker will mark a good day for America.

Pyongyang's missile barrage: Part of Xi's chess match?

Thu, 10 Nov 2022 23:36:19 GMT

PYONGYANGS' MISSILE BARRAGE: PART OF XI'S CHESS MATCH?

James G. Zumwalt / November 9, 2022

World Net Daily ... Gunshots heard one evening last January in Canton, Ohio, had police rushing to a residence where an AR-15 rifle was indiscriminately being fired into the air. As a tall fence blocked their view into the backyard, officers fired through the fence, hitting the shooter, James Williams, 46.

Williams was conducting a family tradition of ringing in the New Year with gunfire, unconcerned as to where the rounds fell. He died honoring a foolish family tradition.

Imagine this same scenario but with missiles being fired recklessly into the air. This happened on Nov. 2 as North Korean leader Kim Jong-un launched 23 missiles within a single day. They fell into international waters on both sides of the Korean Peninsula, one impacting just south of the Northern Limit Line, a de facto inter-Korean maritime border the North does not recognize.

On Nov. 3, Kim launched an ICBM over his eastern waters. On Nov. 9, yet another missile was launched, crashing into the sea after a 250 kilometer flight. Recovered underwater debris revealed it to be a Soviet-era SA-5 surface-to-air missile. It is believed all this is to be followed by a nuclear test in the weeks ahead – the first since 2017.

Kim's missile launch was reckless, with no prior warning to Seoul. While the missiles fell harmlessly into the sea, there was always the risk ships and boats operating in the impact area might get hit.

Prior warning was important too just in case an errant missile impacted where it was not supposed to. Additionally, the North could easily have provoked the South into taking defensive action, fearing an attack was underway.

What then would possess Kim to launch a bevy of missiles in this manner?

While the exercise was an obvious test of the North's missile system, the failure to give notice to the South due to existing tensions between them was just as foolish as the actions of the late Mr. Williams. Pyongyang will undoubtedly claim justification to test its missiles, although doing so violates U.N. Security Council resolutions.

Additionally, it will claim its actions are in response to a joint U.S.-South Korean military exercise recently conducted.

There is probably an ulterior motive as well for Kim's aggressive actions.

China is at the top of a very short list of Pyongyang's friends. Its influence over Kim was obvious after Donald Trump was elected president. Kim made an unprecedented three trips to China within a three month period – two before meeting with Trump and one after – most likely to strategize.

But with a weak-kneed President Joe Biden in the White House now, did China see an opportunity to use Kim as a pawn in its chess match with the West over Taiwan?

With an ongoing Russia/Ukraine war, with threats that Iran may attack Saudi Arabia and with U.S. relations with China at an all-time low, Beijing perhaps sought to underscore for Washington it had additional concerns to worry about should it be thinking about defending Taiwan against a Beijing takeover.

Strengthening this logic is the fact that Chinese President Xi Jinping recently wrote Kim a letter stating the importance of enhanced communications and strengthening the relationship between the two countries. Xi's letter underscored working with Kim in "defending peace and stability in the region and the rest of the world."

Obviously, Kim's missile barrage did nothing to maintain "stability in the region." Clearly, after receiving Xi's letter, Kim would not do anything without consulting with China so as not to offend Xi. This strongly suggests Kim's actions received Xi's blessing.

Beijing likely sought to create the perception America needed to consider the possibility of confronting multi-front conflicts should China invade Taiwan. With Biden's foreign policy team already bouncing three balls in the air – Russia, China and Iran – why not introduce a fourth into the mix – North Korea – as well?

A chaotic world stimulates authoritarian aggression.

While Kim is smart enough to know not to attack the South for now, he is happy, as China's puppet, to assist it by beating war drums on the Korean Peninsula to worry the U.S. about the possibility.

4 disastrous examples of Dems pulling the 'grenade pin'

Fri, 04 Nov 2022 05:35:14 GMT

FOUR DISASTROUS EXAMPLES OF DEMS PULLING THE "GRENADE PIN"

James G. Zumwalt / November 4, 2022

World Net Daily ... For those who have served in uniform, the simple linkage is obvious: If you pull the pin on a hand grenade, a devastating explosion will quickly follow. However, when the pin is pulled by Democrats implementing their destructive domestic policies, there seems to be surprise over the ensuing explosion.

It is as if little thought is given beforehand about the consequences of pin-pulling. To take editorial license with Speaker Nancy Pelosi's famous 2010 statement in support of Obamacare, it is suggesting, "We have to pull the grenade's pin to see what will happen."

Four such "pin-pulling" domestic policies initiated with no prior thought about their explosive consequences follow.

First is defunding police. The racially irresponsible acts of a miniscule number of police officers have triggered equally irresponsible Democrats into supporting this anti-police Black Lives Matter movement across the country.

Apparently, the explosion in violent criminal activity comes as a surprise. At least six major cities are on pace to break the high levels of violent crime experienced the previous year with the largest increases in homicide rates occurring in Democrat-run cities.

As Democratic representatives duck questions about it, a Harvard poll reveals 64% of voters blame this on "woke politicians."

Democrats (52%) and independents (60%) agree. This poll also found police to be one of the most trusted U.S. institutions. But because of Democrats demonize police, an alarming number have committed suicide.

While promoting police defunding, these mental giants devoted very little thought to viable law enforcement options. One suggested teaming unarmed security forces and trained mental health workers together. Once the first of these is killed in the line of duty, causing others to depart, maybe progressives will recognize just how ridiculous the suggestion is.

Additionally, Democrats adopting a soft-on-crime attitude in cities they control, encouraging even more crime, cause businesses to leave. In San Francisco, residents now pack guns just to walk to work.

The second pin-pulling policy is our open southern border. Illegal immigrant numbers are the highest of the century, coming at a time our economy is still reeling from pandemic lockdowns, supply chain woes and out of control inflation.

We are suffering the financial sting of allocating billions of dollars to the care and feeding of an illegal immigration flow of 5 million since Biden took office, and it shows no signs of abatement.

A consequence of this flow is the loss of 100,000 American lives due to the influx of illegal drugs – fueled by Mexican drug cartels, assisted by China. Over a seven-month period, Texas law enforcement seized enough fentanyl to kill every living U.S. citizen.

During a recent appearance by Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas before a House committee, Rep. Michael Johnson, R-La., noted that drug cartels "are drowning our streets in fentanyl and other deadly substances that have made drug overdoses … the number one cause of death for Americans ages 18 to 45."

Additionally, countries like Venezuela are emptying prisons, sending their criminals to us. They are joined by an unknown number of terrorists – creating a mixed bag of evildoers with whom America will eventually have to cope.

As Vice President Kamala Harris audaciously says a border she has yet to visit is secure, we learn from Mexico's president that President Biden wants open U.S.-Mexico-Canadian borders.

Third is the castration of the U.S. oil industry to make oil scarce and the premature push to get Americans transitioning from fossil-fueled to electric vehicles (EVs). A recent EV flaw revealed during Hurricane Ian demonstrated their batteries are susceptible to hard-to-extinguish chemical fires, triggered by flood waters.

More forethought is required concerning these "mobile explosive vehicles" before fully relying upon them.

The fourth pin-pulling policy is transgenderism, totally dismissing its impact upon biological females. Transgenderism has now so clouded the gender issue that a female Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) nominee, asked during confirmation hearings to define what a "woman" is, declined to do so.

The fact that nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, now a SCOTUS justice, is recognized as the first black female member of that esteemed court raises the question: How do we so recognize her if we cannot even define what a woman is?

Democrats apparently are unwilling to provide a definition lest they endanger the liberal cause of equating transgender "women" with biological women. Thus, they seem content in taking the approach enunciated by Justice Potter Stewart in a 1964 SCOTUS case concerning the definition of "hard" pornography. Unable to define it, Stewart declared, "I know it when I see it."

Title IX was passed under the Education Amendments of 1972, banning sex-based discrimination in any school or educational program receiving federal funding. This gave a major boost to female school sports programs. Such programs have blossomed over the years – until recently. They have now been disrupted by a transgenderist wave drowning out fair competition within women-only sports.

It is obvious biological males have greater physical attributes than biological females. This is why the time logged by the world's fastest male runner will never be bettered by the world's fastest female runner – the result of differing hip structures. Similarly, the world record for the heaviest deadweight lift will always be held by males due to their strength advantage over females.

But liberals seek to ignore the fact when biological males transition to transgender females, they still retain these physical advantages. Thus Title IX is now unfairly applied in a way never intended by the 1972 law, allowing transgender women to benefit from this advantage in female sporting competitions.

Biological females, recognizing the unfairness of this, are stepping up to challenge this as Democratic representatives refuse to do so.

Ironically, if true fairness is sought for all four groups – biological males, biological females, transgender males and transgender females – the only real solution is tossing biology out the window, declaring four genders exist, each with their own qualifying participants. This would prevent any one gender from ever having an advantage over another.

It is outrageous Democrats have adopted pin-pulling strategies concerning their domestic policies. Every one delineated above has created needless devastation. As former Democrat presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard explains , the political party she left is run by "fanatical ideologues."

The social chaos, economic turmoil and body count of Americans felled by illegal drugs – all creations of Democratic policy – will continue for years to come. Biden, already serving as the oldest U.S. president in history, will probably not be around to ultimately be held accountable.

Hopefully, voters will use the upcoming midterm elections to send him the message his presidency has been an absolute train wreck.

Retired admirals and generals' midterm warning to America

Thu, 03 Nov 2022 23:33:11 GMT

RETIRED ADMIRALS AND GENERALS GIVE MIDTERM WARNING TO AMERICA

James G. Zumwalt / November 2, 2022

World Net Daily ... Promoting a political position is always more effective when delivered with an impressive punch.

In May 2021, an open letter was published, accompanied by a star-studded delivery, expressing concerns about where America was heading following the 2020 presidential election.

The stars involved were not Hollywood or professional sports elites who, quick to offer political opinions for love of country, have never had it tested.

The punch behind this letter came from stars worn by 200 retired admirals/generals – men and women who have demonstrated their love of country in the defense of our nation – many on battlefields far away, such as Medal of Honor recipient Marine Corps Maj. Gen. James Livingston.

An updated version of this letter is now being circulated prior to midterm elections as the 2021 concerns have only heightened since then. This letter signed by 157 admirals/generals.

Having served in uniform and attained ranks demanding a great deal of personal sacrifice, these military leaders are blessed with an ability to sense threats to our republic long before others do. Therefore, their letter issues a stark warning: Our nation is losing the fight for survival as a constitutional republic against those steering us toward the historically failed systems of socialism/Marxism.

We are forewarned about the authoritarian form of government such systems demand. They can only be achieved here by "we the people" sacrificing our constitutional freedoms – i.e., submitting to "unconstitutional government mandates and intrusions into everyday lives."

The groundwork for this was laid by the coronavirus, which led to the implementation of the faulty voting procedures now raising election integrity issues.

The letter explains that, over the past 60 years, as to socialism/Marxism, Americans have become too complacent, allowing these ideologies to successfully infiltrate our major institutions. These include educational institutions, news and social media, judicial and political systems, the entertainment industry, corporations and even, sadly, our military.

The signatories believe political correctness, which has promoted woke social programs like "Critical Race Theory" and "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion," is causing the military "to lose focus on the reason it exists: to fight and win our Nation's wars." This has now been reflected by the military's failure to meet its recruiting goals.

Despite threats posed by China, Russia, Iran, North Korea and Islamic terrorism, the letter notes the greatest threat existing to our survival is not foreign but domestic. Meanwhile, our foreign enemies sense that America's weak political leadership leaves our ship of state rudderless and easily susceptible to their anti-U.S. actions.

We have shot ourselves in the foot as:

"The 'rule of law' is lost when a double standard exists, laws are selectively enforced, mayors and DAs decide when to prosecute based on politics, preference goes to criminals over victims, the DOJ/FBI is weaponized against parents speaking at school board meetings, and now blatantly against political opponents.

Defund the police movements endanger all Americans, especially in large cities where minorities often suffer the most. Without the 'rule of law' and accountability, we have lost our Republic."

When the 1787 Constitutional Convention deliberations ended, Benjamin Franklin was asked as he walked out to an awaiting crowd, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."

Whether we can keep it depends on what happens on Nov. 8.

The 157 patriots above came together to sound an alarm to awaken America. It has been heard by the largest number of military veterans seeking office in years. Hopefully, voters will take this wokeism vision of America's future in a new direction, rejecting the influence of those who would destroy the republic.

Mother's plea underscores failure of Democrats' agenda

Thu, 03 Nov 2022 19:14:30 GMT

MOTHER'S PLEA UNDERSCORES FAILURE OF DEMOCRATS' AGENDA

James G. Zumwalt / November 3, 2022

World Net Daily ... A mother's recent plea on national television identifies THE major problem with Democrats' domestic policies.

On "Fox & Friends First," Pennsylvania mother Leslie Holt shared the tragedy of losing her daughter to fentanyl.

She lambasted Democratic senatorial candidate John Fetterman for the Democrats' "totally outrageous" progressive crime policies voiced during his debate.

Fetterman supports Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner's progressive agenda, despite violence in the City of Love surging to record-high levels. Helped into office by a $1.7 million campaign contribution from billionaire George Soros, Krasner implements policies releasing criminals back out into the public. Pennsylvania's Republican-run House now seeks to remove Krasner.

Holt lamented...

..."This is [really] not a message just for John Fetterman. … What I'm speaking to are the moms, the families who have lost their kids to fentanyl poisoning, and anyone...

...regardless of whether it's John Fetterman or any other politician who is running it, they have to realize that victims' rights, my rights as a parent, my daughter's right to be alive [is] not something that you can 'just' blithely push away. That's unacceptable."

Fentanyl deaths are reaching record levels due to the "easy pass" access given to drug cartels crossing our borders, courtesy of President Joe Biden. They are being joined by record numbers of illegal immigrants that include violent criminals as well as terrorists .

A common thread is emerging – one further evidenced by the thousands of Americans who will die as victims of crimes or car accidents involving illegals.

This thread is not one related just to outside influences entering the country but also to a wokeist plague that divides us. Wokeism rejects the concept of universal human equality, instead injecting the premise that a divisive systemic white privilege mindset is harbored by all Caucasians and therefore must be eradicated.

Wokeism drives Americans away from the mindset that has historically proved imperative in challenging times – such as World War II. It is a mindset best reflected by the words of the popular 19th century author Alexandre Dumas.

In his novel "The Three Musketeers," Dumas popularized the creed "all for one and one for all." Sadly, however, that creed has fallen victim, due to 21st century wokeism, to one of "everyone for themselves," depending upon a particular group identity.

Interestingly, the second part of the Dumas quote, often not quoted, but even more important is: "… united we stand divided we fall."

So what is the common thread?

America is a nation of 330 million people. It is impossible for a government to be all things to all people. Therefore, it has to focus upon the citizenry's collective interest in the common good.

Concerning illegal immigration, this is not done by opening our border floodgates, creating numerous problems for American citizens. Yet illegal immigrants are actually being treated better than our homeless as we ignore the wisdom of "charity begins at home."

Meanwhile, other policies, such as transgenderism, set a precedent for a belief system pandering to a small minority by which the rights of the few are prioritized over those of the many. This belief system dismisses the concept of the universal equality of all human life, trumping the common good.

As Holt's comments above suggest, this belief system has even led, in criminal cases, to recognizing perpetrators' rights over victims' rights. To retain power, Democrats favor using victimization's dividing call rather than equality's unification call – ironically while denying the former to a group desperately needing it most, the unborn.

Far from healing America's social wounds, Democrats' agenda opens them up. Those wounds will continue bleeding absent application of the salve of the common good.

Biden's myriad pre-midterms deceptions

Thu, 27 Oct 2022 03:43:11 GMT

BIDEN'S MYRIAD PRE-MIDTERMS DECEPTIONS

James G. Zumwalt / October 26, 2022

World Net Daily ... With midterm elections only days away, it is clear several of President Joe Biden's initiatives have attempted to deceive voters that the situation in America on various levels is not as bad as it obviously is.

He promotes this with a policy of hoping to delay the truth from coming out until after Nov. 8.

With gas prices on the rise, Biden went to Saudi Arabia in July, hat in hand, to convince Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to increase oil production. The audacity of Biden doing so, especially after having called the country a "pariah" state during his presidential campaign, obviously did not earn him a warm welcome.

While Biden defended his trip as an opportunity to "strengthen a strategic partnership," his real purpose was to beg for increased oil production to help bolster sagging support for Democrats prior to the midterm elections.

However, not only did the crown prince reject Biden's request, three months later he announced a massive cut to oil production for purely economic reasons caused by a demand downturn. Biden immediately requested the cut be delayed until after midterm elections, again receiving a negative response from the Saudis.

But, wait. Then adding insult to injury, Saudi Arabia announced later it would increase its energy partnership with China – the world's biggest oil importer.

Realizing he had now been screwed twice by the Saudis and still unwilling to admit he was wrong to severely curtail domestic oil production, Biden took the only viable option left.

Seeking to soften the impact of rising gas prices, he turned to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) – again.

In 1975, two years after the Arab oil embargo had rocked America to its core (and driving interest rates to over 20% Congress established the SPR . It is a collection of underground salt caverns in Texas and Louisiana, designed to hold over 700 million barrels of oil, for use in emergencies.

What qualifies as an "emergency" has come to vary over the years – from natural disasters to wars - but at no time has it included domestic politics.

Unsurprisingly, that is the basis for Biden announcing he will release an additional 15 million barrels from the SPR. He did the same thing earlier after first tightening the faucet on America's domestic oil flow, triggering increased gas prices and causing him to announce an SPR release of 180 million barrels.

With diesel fuel supplies at their lowest levels since 2008, Americans will be feeling this impact within weeks after midterms as the shortage further exasperates supply chain issues.

With Democrats' downward spiraling poll numbers, Biden undoubtedly views midterm elections as a political emergency, creating a need to temporarily deceive voters on what is to come. Biden's effort to reduce the reality of exorbitantly high gas prices with periodic releases has dropped the SPR to its lowest levels since 1984.

Claiming his motivation is to reduce gas prices and, strangely, to boost domestic oil production, his critics call him out for a "transparently political" move.

Meanwhile, Biden reports he will develop a plan to refill the SPR when prices dip down to between $67-$72 per barrel. This is interesting as in 2020, Democrats blocked an effort by Trump to refill the SPR with at least 77 million barrels for less than $20 per barrel. The only reason Democrats blocked this effort was to play their anti-Trump card.

Yet another area Biden has targeted for deception prior to the midterms is the illegal immigration mess he created at the border. As record numbers of illegals transit a border Biden has made clear he will not protect, it has gotten so bad that even Democrat mayors, whose cities are suffering the impact, are taking a contrary stand to their party's line that the border is secure .

Again, in an effort to deceive voters, President Biden has pressured his fellow party members to withhold drawing attention to the border invasion.

Three of the El Paso, Texas, City Council's eight members urged Mayor Oscar Leeser to issue an emergency declaration due to the city being over-populated by immigrants filling up shelters and local hotels. At one point, over 2,100 illegals were crossing the border at El Paso day in and day out.

And yet, despite these numbers, White House officials began pressuring Leeser not to do so, at least before the elections, as it would make Biden look bad.

Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, whose district covers rural areas and border towns near El Paso, says , "It is a sleight of hand what the administration is doing – pressuring the local government to not issue a declaration of emergency, to say as if everything is going OK."

Gonzales then added that the current border situation is "worse than people realize."

At a Sept. 27 city council meeting, Lesser reportedly told those present that Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, had urged him not to declare an emergency, promising that the White House would "continue to work with us and continue to give us … money through (the) Federal Emergency Management Agency."

So far, El Paso has only received $2 million in federal reimbursements, having spent $8 million. Apparently, money speaks louder than honesty with constituents.

We can only hope when Election Day voters enter their booths, they will remember it is not only Biden who has been deceiving them but a party leadership that values power over the best interests of their state and our country.

How do these leaders deceive voters? Let us count the ways.

Hurricane Ian's troubling lesson about electric vehicles

Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:18:40 GMT

HURRICANE IAN'S TROUBLING LESSON ABOUT ELECTRIC VEHICLES

James G. Zumwalt / October 19, 2022

World Net Daily ... As Hurricane Ian ravaged southern Florida before heading north up the East Coast, the unique damage it inflicted upon electric vehicles (EVs) should provide a wake-up call for President Joe Biden and other green energy activists pushing battery power over fossil-fuel power, at least at this stage of the game.

Biden is so committed to EVs he even admits he cut U.S. oil production to raise the price of gasoline, simply to make Americans go green. And California Gov. Gavin Newsom became the first state executive to mandate all new vehicles must be zero emission by 2035, followed by New York. But Hurricane Ian has exposed a major flaw in EV batteries that activists have ignored for years.

That impact can no longer be ignored.

With the seawater Ian pushed ashore in Florida, many EV owners were shocked to see their cars explode from "thermal runaway." This is the process by which a chain reaction within a lithium battery is triggered, creating a fire that becomes very difficult to stop.

These high-voltage batteries, consisting of numerous cells, tightly packed together in a watertight, fire-resistant box, have a significant drawback – they operate within a very narrow temperature range. If a single cell should fail, it essentially becomes a small explosive, creating a tremendous amount of heat in only tenths of a second. The ensuing chemical fire, unlike regular fires, does not need oxygen from the atmosphere to sustain itself. Such explosions can also be created by highway collisions.

Thus, putting out a chemical fire not in need of oxygen can be most challenging.

The truth of the matter is there is no easy way to do it. The direct cooling of battery cells is perhaps the best way but is time-consuming. In some cases it has taken as much as 8,000 gallons of water with firefighters on the scene for four or more hours.

Where a fire cannot be extinguished, there can be a supervised burn out to prevent its spread by soaking the surrounding area with water. But a battery fire, appearing to have burned out, many times has not, resulting in reignition.

Imagine the dangers EV batteries present. A battery fire in a garaged vehicle could burn the entire house down if not stopped. Or, in highway crashes involving EV batteries, there is little time to contain the fire long enough to rescue those trapped inside a vehicle.

It would be interesting to know what the official position of the Secret Service is if the opportunity presented itself to field an EV limousine for the president, along with his caravan of security vehicles. Would they suggest an EV limo may well impose additional risks on the president's safety?

The state fire marshal for Florida, Jimmy Patronis, was so concerned about these EV fires, he sent a letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) summarizing his observations concerning the difficulty of putting EV fires out, especially those that reignite. Patronis demanded a quick answer to several questions including:

1) What advice has NHTSA mandated EV car manufacturers provide vehicle users about flooding damage to batteries?

2) Will standard firefighter gear protect against EV fire gases?

3) Should EV removal from hurricane zones be a designated cleanup duty?

4) Does NHTSA have any timeline data concerning post-flooding EV fires?

5) Does NHTSA have guidance on locations to deposit EVs posing a reigniting problem?

NHTSA advises that it has been studying the saltwater corrosion of batteries issue since Superstorm Sandy raised the problem in October 2012. It noted...

.."Fires in electric vehicles can pose unique challenges for firefighters and other first responders. Since similar issues emerged with EVs after Superstorm Sandy, NHTSA has been researching the effect of saltwater immersion on batteries, and working with stakeholders to equip first responders with best practices on fighting battery fires.

"Nine years after Superstorm Sandy, in 2021, NHTSA launched the Battery Safety Initiative to "research areas such as battery diagnostics, management systems and even cybersecurity to ensure future cars with batteries onboard to power the entire vehicle are as safe as can be."

Thus, an EV battery problem we have known about for 10 years, one occurring even when a vehicle is not in operation, still remains unresolved, still posing a dangerous threat to both people and property.

Yet, despite this, Newsom is giving Californians just 13 more years to transition away from fossil-fueled cars to zero emission vehicles while Biden implements domestic policies driving American citizens to the same goal nationwide.

Six auto manufacturers have committed to phase out gas-powered cars within the next two decades. They are already taking steps to do so. Soon they will reach a point of no return. Other reasons exist for not pushing forward with EVs as well, such as an adequate infrastructure system for power and the exorbitant cost to buy a "mobile explosive."

Hurricane Ian has demonstrated that when it comes to EVs, its proponents have put the proverbial cart before the horse.

The media's walk on the dark side

Thu, 13 Oct 2022 01:42:37 GMT

THE MEDIA'S WALK ON THE DARK SIDE

James G. Zumwalt / October 10, 2022

World Net Daily ... From 1918 until 1991, " Pravda " – meaning "Truth" – was the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. But the people of the Soviet Union understood something about Pravda that many naive Westerners did not. Despite its auspicious name, Pravda rarely published the truth.

Interestingly, today dozens of news outlets around the U.S. promote themselves as independent local news websites when, in fact, they are not. Sadly, naive locals fall prey to them, allowing themselves to be misled in ways Soviet citizens were smart enough to avoid with Pravda.

More than four dozen news outlets represent themselves today on the internet as supposedly being independent local news websites; however, they are far from what they advertise. Instead, they fall under a single network managed by Democratic operatives pushing their political party's agenda.

All 51 of these websites are based in Washington, D.C., yet, to give a contrary appearance, they operate under names reflecting a non-Washington location, such as the "Milwaukee Metro Times."

These news websites are not independent at all. They are linked together under a single for-profit corporate entity known as Local Report Inc. That company was established in 2021 in Florida and, ever since, has flown under the radar as far as its representation of but a single political ideology.

Most of the articles these websites post originate from a single source as well – The American Independent.

This is a progressive media group that was started by David Brock, co-founder of Media Matters. It describes itself as the "No. 1 digital platform for progressive news," claiming to "strive to report with honesty and integrity and shine a light on those in power who obstruct progress."

While The American Independent reveals, in the interests of "honesty and integrity," it is a progressive-centered news source, Local Report Inc. and its network of 51 websites undertake no similar effort to disclose their single-track progressive agenda, packaged as independent news.

Despite Local Report Inc.'s less than honest approach to news reporting, a much more blatant example of a hidden liberal bias by a newspaper occurred recently in Arizona.

The Arizona Republic, the largest newspaper in the state, is recognized as favoring liberal causes. An ethical issue arose after a recent debate between the Republican and Democratic attorney general candidates, Abe Hamadeh and Kris Mayes, respectively.

During a 27-minute debate, moderators devoted the majority of the time (17 minutes) focusing on the Republican candidate's stand on abortion and the 2020 presidential election.

But even more egregious than this time imbalance was the fact that one of the moderators, Stacy Barchenger, from the Arizona Republic, failed to disclose that the Democratic candidate had a lengthy career as a reporter for that same newspaper.

This was clearly an ethical violation, especially since the Arizona Republic had agreed, prior to the debate, it would disclose the relationship. Furthermore, despite the newspaper having in its possession evidence concerning allegations of insider trading by Mayes as well as her extreme left-leaning policy ideas, all this was suppressed.

Outrageously, the newspaper apparently chose to toss fairness, impartiality and ethics aside in order to promote its preferred liberal candidate. It is shocking that the newspaper thought it could get away with taking such action.

In a written protest to the Arizona Newspaper Association, Hamadeh was generous to claim Barchenger " forgot to divulge her employer's connection" concerning Mayes to the audience at the outset of the debate.

Additionally, Hamadeh wrote that Mayes was not questioned at all, apparently only responding to Hamadeh's comments, while Hamadeh was subjected to "harsh inquiries with numerous follow-up questions." Hamadeh has demanded an ethics investigation be initiated – to include any interactions between the newspaper and Mayes that may have occurred prior to the debate.

The extent to which left-leaning news sources will go also was demonstrated by The Seattle Times.

While it is typical for campaign ads that quote news sources to use that source's masthead, when Republican Senate candidate Tiffany Smiley did just that, the newspaper demanded she remove its masthead from such a quote, claiming it "left the mistaken impression the Times had endorsed her campaign."

The Seattle Times has endorsed Smiley's opponent, incumbent Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the last four times she has run for office without ever questioning Murray's use of its masthead in her campaign ads.

Despite liberals in general also benefiting from a similarly minded social media that seeks to shut down conservative thought, they still feel a need to disguise their true agenda by creating the illusion it emanates from neutral sources. This anti-conservative mindset has progressed to the point now that news publications, which should be promoting free speech, brazenly demonstrate a contrary intent.

When it comes to freedom of speech and the press, sadly these liberals have managed to secure the best of both worlds for themselves, promoting an agenda protected from valid criticism.

So inspired are they by the ideological rush generated by their doing so, either deceptively or brazenly, they fail to realize the bountiful rights of our republic are suffering a slow death, withering upon the vine of freedom.

The media are taking a walk on the dark side and need to be called out for it.

Nord Stream sabotage: How to identify the culprit

Wed, 05 Oct 2022 23:40:50 GMT

NORD STREAM SABOTAGE: HOW TO IDENTIFY THE CULPRIT

James G. Zumwalt / October 5, 2022

World Net Daily ... In Sept. 26, the Norwegian Petroleum Safety Administration (NPSA) warned of "deliberate attacks" against the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which carry gas from Russia to Europe, where Germany is the primary recipient. The NPSA reported multiple sightings of unidentified drones flying near offshore oil and gas installations.

Only a few hours later, Denmark detected a gas leak along a section of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, under the Baltic Ocean, off the coast of the Danish island of Bornholm, within its exclusive economic zone. This was followed by a second leak. It was believed both were caused by explosions rupturing the lines, which are operated by Russian gas giant Gazprom.

Clearly, the explosions were the work of saboteurs – but the question is who would have done it and why?

While the blame game – Russia accusing the European Union and the U.S. with both the latter accusing Russia – has started, there is an effective way to determine who is responsible. However, let us first examine the arguments concerning who had the most to gain from such an act of sabotage.

Why would Russia sabotage its own pipelines that provide an economic lifeline for the country's biggest exports – oil and gas?

An answer could be the embarrassing beating Russia is taking at the hands of the Ukrainians. What President Vladimir Putin believed from his intelligence people would be a slam-dunk invasion of Ukraine has now turned into an 8-month slog, with Russian troops on the run. It is estimated over 80,000 Russian soldiers have died. That is obviously upsetting a lot of Russian mothers.

Additionally, Putin is now having to call up his reserves. This has caused many young Russian men to flee the country. Russian citizens, angry over Putin's initiation of an unnecessary war, despite seeing how his high level critics are experiencing sudden death syndrome, are taking to the streets in protest.

There also allegedly have been several assassination attempts on Putin's life.

The above conditions were ripe for the Russian president to undertake an action seeking to rally his people around him. What better way to do so than to sabotage these pipelines and then blame it on the West? It brings back memories of the 1898 sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor off the coast of Cuba.

While responsibility for the explosion was never determined, the act rallied the American people to declare war against Spain two months later, believing it had sabotaged the ship.

If Russia was responsible, this is an act of environmental terrorism. It also demonstrates the vulnerability of undersea infrastructure – whether oil/gas pipelines or lines of communication – to such attacks.

As one European official, blaming Moscow, has suggested , "It's to threaten the West (by saying) that 'we can damage your communications as well' … pipelines, electricity lines, communication cables. The seabed is full of them." This would be the kind of "hybrid" warfare Russia likes to conduct against the West as it already finds itself fully tested in Ukraine.

Pipeline repairs will not be quick – taking at least six months to a year. The pipeline was not laid in such a way so as to make it possible to hoist it up. And the vessels used to lay pipe and make such repairs are currently banned by Western sanctions. This could, therefore, be a way of Russia seeking the lifting of sanctions.

As a European official noted , anything that contributes to "make sure Europe realizes it's going to be a cold winter" provides "the Kremlin (with) a symbolic victory." We also need to recognize that Putin is capable of anything.

On the other side of the debate, why would the U.S. undertake such an act of sabotage?

One key reason cited by supporters of this argument is a statement Biden made in February. He threatened back then to "bring an end" to the Nord Stream 2. And the CIA forewarned Germany about a possible attack on the pipeline beforehand.

While a Department of State spokesperson denied the U.S. had anything to do with it, he also suggested anyone promoting such a position is spreading misinformation. Additionally, Biden supporters undoubtedly object to such a claim as they see their environmentally centric president as being incapable of undertaking such an environmentally destructive action.

Clearly, state support was involved. While the pipelines lie in shallow waters, a successful attack required knowledge of its location, its vulnerability and the means to deliver explosives to the target. There are numerous possible delivery systems that could have performed the dirty deed, including a submarine, aircraft, drone, missile or deep-sea divers.

Who, then, is responsible for this act of sabotage?

An investigation has already been launched by several European countries. There is a rush to recover whatever evidence can be collected, including tracking data for ships loitering in the area prior to the explosions, review of signals intelligence, remnants of the explosive devices, etc.

And yet even if the evidence ends up pointing to Russia, qualifying as an attack against NATO, it's very doubtful that military action will be taken against Russia.

But we have a tremendous asset to provide us with a quick answer to "whodunit." We need only to seek out its wise counsel.

That asset is a group of 51 intelligence experts who proved their bona fides to us when the issue of Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop computer first came to light.

The laptop held damning evidence about Hunter's criminal actions as well as the involvement of his father in receiving compensation for his son's business deals with China. The FBI had this "laptop from hell" in its possession for many months beforehand but failed to act on its contents. We now know that was due to the political actions of a pro-Biden FBI cabal, free-wheeling within the agency.

As the timing of the laptop's revelation was just before the 2020 presidential election, this group of 51 intelligence experts assured us it did not belong to Hunter but, rather, was the product of a Russian counter-intelligence effort to undermine Joe Biden's election.

We need to solicit the opinion of these 51 experts again as to whose fingerprints they believe to be on the Nord Stream leak. Based on what they say, we will then know the answer is the opposite of what they tell us.

Democrats suffering from 'Mammy Yokum Syndrome'

Thu, 29 Sep 2022 00:04:41 GMT

DEMOCRATS SUFFERING FROM "MAMMY YOKUM SYNDROME"

James G. Zumwalt / September 28, 2022

World Net Daily ... Democratic Party members appear to be suffering from "Mammy Yokum Syndrome" (MYS).

For those who remember the American newspaper comic strip "Li'l Abner" – cartoonist Al Capp's creation about a hillbilly family named Yokum – one of his characters was matriarch Mammy Yokum. She was the arbiter of all disagreements who ended any discussion of an issue with the words "I has spoken."

Among the victims suffering from MYS today are President Joe Biden and Georgia's Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Stacey Abrams.

Biden has demonstrated symptoms on numerous occasions. Take, for example, the issue of whether America is in a recession. A fairly straightforward definition of recession had long been accepted before Biden became president.

In December 2000, President Bill Clinton defined it as "two quarters in a row of negative growth." Not a peep was heard from then-Sen. Biden to dispute Clinton's definition.

However, earlier this year, as we approached our second quarter of negative growth, Biden redefined recession, undoubtedly in an effort to prolong having to accept the obvious.

He declared a second negative quarter did not really mean we were entering a recession, claiming that prolonged COVID-19 factors, along with the war in Ukraine, had so muddled economic projections that a variety of economic signals – not just Gross Domestic Product – had to be examined.

Biden's bottom line would have done Mammy Yokum proud as basically he told us there would be no recession unless he decided otherwise – end of argument.

The president's "I has spoken" line was readily accepted by a Biden-can-do-no-wrong mainstream media (MSM), which would have gone after a Republican president for taking such a position. It was no sooner after this MYS moment had passed, however, that Biden provided us with another one.

During a "60 Minutes" interview, Biden proclaimed the COVID-19 pandemic to be over, despite over 2 million reported cases in August that included 13,606 deaths. Additionally, while both Dr. Anthony Fauci and CDC Director Rochelle Walensky disagreed with Biden's claim, most of MSM seemed to accept it as the president embraced the fallacy that, if he said it was over, it was over.

White House officials did try to walk back Biden's declaration as a confused public wondered who exactly is running the administration. There have been so many times Biden's staff has had to huddle up to translate what the president "meant" to say, it is surprising they have yet to establish a new Cabinet post position for a Secretary of Translation.

More recently, candidate Abrams has also demonstrated MYS symptoms. Having failed to win her previous campaign against the current Republican governor, Abrams is pulling out all stops to trigger liberal support for her campaign.

This includes promulgating misinformation to the public with an outrageous claim she made about abortion in an effort to appease pro-choice voters.

During a panel discussion on abortion, self-declared medical expert Abrams made the following insane comment to promote a "wild conspiracy theory" of her own creation: "There is no such thing as a heartbeat at six weeks. It is a manufactured sound designed to convince people that men have the right to take control of a woman's body."

Apparently, Abrams' "I has spoken" position on the issue was found acceptable by Planned Parenthood – which provides abortions across the nation – as indicated by a change to its website fact sheet. It sought to downplay the sound of a heartbeat being detectable in the first five to six weeks of fetal heart development as per Abrams' opinion.

The Planned Parenthood change reads, "It sounds like a heartbeat on an ultrasound, but it's not a fully-formed heart – it's the earliest stage of the heart developing."

Reluctant to label it as a heartbeat, Planned Parenthood says there is "cardiac activity" at five to six weeks.

While medical experts do disagree on when the heartbeat begins in the embryo, Dr. Tara Sander Lee says , "A preborn baby's heart is actively beating at 6 weeks and will have beat nearly 16 million times by 15 weeks. In fact, at 6 weeks' gestation, the baby's heart rate is about 98 beats per minute, which can be easily detected by ultrasound

Note to Abrams: Dr. Lee is a woman and she hears the heartbeat

Trying to deny a human heartbeat is what it is by giving it a label such as "cardiac activity" is similar to what Biden did to deny a recession is what it is.

At least Planned Parenthood did not go as far to the left as to give credence to Abrams' idiotic conspiracy claim that any ultrasound detection is simply manufactured as a ploy designed to convince people that men have the right to take control of a woman's body.

Symptoms of MYS affliction involve using wordsmithing to avoid accepting truth. Sadly, many Democratic Party leaders appear to be terminally ill.

Abortion from a warrior's perspective

Tue, 27 Sep 2022 03:35:53 GMT

ABORTION FROM A WARRIOR'S PERSPECTIVE

James G. Zumwalt / September 22, 2022

World Net Daily ... During a recent pro-abortion rally, actress Busy Philipps boasted about the abortion she had undergone at age 15. She screamed out to the crowd that abortion immensely helped her further her career.

Her message was most disturbing in that the reason for her abortion was all about one person – her.

Philipps proudly proclaimed , "There I was sitting in Los Angeles in my beautiful office of my own late-night show. I'd soon be driving my hybrid to my beautiful f***king home to kiss my beautiful and healthy children and my husband, who had taken the year off to parent so I could focus on my career, and I have all of this! All of it because, because , because I was allowed bodily autonomy at 15."

Lost in Philipp's self-righteous rant was any thought about the death of or suffering by her unborn child while undergoing the abortion.

Her comment that her husband had taken a year off to care for their children probably gave listeners some comfort in knowing her "beautiful and healthy children" were in no danger of being similarly sacrificed should they somehow endanger her future career opportunities. At least they are safe for another year!

But Philipps' tirade caused me to reflect upon my career in the U.S. Marine Corps and my participation in three conflicts – the Vietnam War, the 1989 incursion into Panama and the 1990 Persian Gulf War. Undoubtedly, my participation in those conflicts, either directly or indirectly, contributed to enemy soldiers losing their lives. My participation also probably enhanced my career as a Marine leader.

However, I never felt compelled to boast that I furthered my military career by causing the deaths of those fighting on the opposite side of the battlefield.

The sight of an enemy soldier's body – torn apart by various weapons of war and lying strewn about the ground like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle on a table – never gave me any sense of satisfaction. Nor was I ever prompted to declare "this will help my career!" – which was the underlying theme of Philipps' message.

For a warrior, the tragedy of having been responsible for the deaths of enemy soldiers is rationalized to some degree by the knowledge it is either them or us. Causing the death of an enemy combatant is basically one of fairness in knowing one side has just as much motivation and opportunity to inflict death upon the other, feeding an "it is either you or me" mentality.

But this sense of fairness is sadly ignored by women who boast about their abortions after having taken the life of an unborn child.

Where is the fairness in weighing the totally irresponsible action of Philipps in getting pregnant in the first place, creating an unwanted human life, and then opting for the abortion of a child whose only "crime" was seeking to experience life outside the womb to suckle at the breast of a loving mother?

While Philipps appears to give her aborted child the status of an inhuman clump of cells to wash her hands of responsibility for taking the life of another human being, prosecutors in a 2018 murder case saw things much differently.

When 30-year-old Ricky Anderson shot his pregnant girlfriend, Karmeshi Pipes, 26, a total of 17 times, they charged him with two counts of first-degree murder – one charge for the murder of the mother and one for the murder of her unborn child.

But for the warrior, a sense of closure is sometimes needed after an enemy life has been taken on a battlefield, even if it is decades later in coming.

For example, during the Vietnam War, a U.S. soldier's unit engaged an enemy force, killing several. When the battle ended, the bodies of enemy soldiers were stripped of possessions, mostly for intelligence purposes but also as souvenirs. One U.S. soldier removed photographs from a body that appeared to be of the dead soldier's young family.

Decades later, perhaps troubled by his actions in removing the photographs, the soldier took action. He told his story to the Vietnamese media, which published it along with the photographs, explaining he sought to get them back into the rightful hands of the enemy soldier's family. He was successful in doing so.

No such sense of guilt was at all apparent in Philipp's chest-thumping support for her abortion, one serving no purpose other than promoting her career. Interestingly, had the soldier above committed the crime Philipps did – killing an unarmed, innocent child – he would have been guilty of a war crime.

Philipps also dismisses another consideration. Just like a soldier felled on a battlefield but still struggling to survive can feel the pain of his wound, so too can a fetus that is being aborted. As a noted expert explains ...

..."From the 16th week of gestation onward, abortions are commonly performed … by 'dilatation and evacuation,' or D&E. The fetus is now too big to be merely scraped and sucked out. Planned Parenthood describes a D&E as the 'use [of] a combination of medical tools and a suction device to gently take the pregnancy tissue out of your uterus.'

As above, 'pregnancy tissue' is a euphemism for the fetus and placenta. And 'gently' may apply to the experience of the mother, who is typically sedated or anesthetized during the procedure, but it certainly does not describe what is happening to the fetus."

Despite this, some Democrats not only support abortion up until birth but even after birth.

One wishes Philipps was shown a photo of the dismembered body of her unborn child – one barbarically ripped apart. Regardless of whether body parts are those of an aborted child or an enemy soldier on the battlefield, any boastful sense of satisfaction is callous.

Phillips' pro-abortion boasting desecrated the sanctity of a life taken.

Ex-prez of S. Korea scrutinized for returning defectors to North

Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:42:03 GMT

EX-PREZ OF SOUTH KOREA SCRUTINIZED FOR RETURNING DEFECTORS TO THE NORTH

James G. Zumwalt / September 14, 2022

World Net Daily ... Republicans have promised, should they retake the U.S. House and Senate in the upcoming midterm elections, they will restore government accountability by going after opposition party members who have abused their power in office.

Meanwhile, thousands of miles away, in South Korea, the recently seated government of President Yoon Suk-yeol is making good on a similar pre-election promise.

The previous administration of President Moon Jae-in committed an unspeakable wrong, resulting in the certain tortuous deaths of two North Korean fishermen. Yoon intends to hold Moon accountable. Attempting to defect, the two North Koreans were labeled "dangerous criminals" by Moon, without affording them the most basic of human rights, before forcefully returning them.

While evidence suggests the two may have committed crimes to make their escape, the real justification by Moon for returning them runs contrary to everything for which democracy stands.

On Nov. 2, 2019, the fisherman, both in their 20s, entered South Korean waters aboard a fishing vessel. The South Korean navy chased the boat for two days. As it did so, the Moon government was communicating with the North about what was happening.

But, because the South Koreans were led to believe the two had gained control of the ship by killing 16 other crew members and dumping their bodies overboard, Moon did something South Korea had never before done in its history. He returned the two fishermen to the North, unbelievably only 48 hours after seizing the ship.

Effecting a speedy return of the North Koreans appeared to be Moon's only concern as he completely disregarded both domestic and international law.

If 16 crewmen were murdered, that is a heinous crime in need of being addressed; however, such "evidence" appears to come from the North. While no other crew members were found onboard, perhaps they had been put out to sea in a lifeboat to make their way back. If so, it is disgusting to think Seoul immediately returned them absent a thorough investigation and trial.

If a guilty verdict was rendered by a South Korean court, it would have earned them a prison sentence, to be served in the South. This would have been a much more humanitarian fate than what awaited them in the North. While Moon claims the two admitted their guilt, there is no evidence of this. Even the United Nations criticized the Moon government for violating the fishermen's rights.

Jung Gwang-il escaped from the North earlier and now lives in the South, having been granted asylum. He stated , "If the South Korean government recognizes them as criminals without a trial or investigation, then I am also a criminal as well."

South Korea released a four-minute video of the two fishermen being forcibly returned across the border at the DMZ. It is heartbreaking to watch. They are seen, blindfolded and bound, physically resisting their return, obviously recognizing more than just a fast execution awaited them. One of them had to be forcibly dragged and ultimately carried across.

Undoubtedly, that video will be played and replayed repeatedly in North Korea to show its citizens the futility of trying to defect as the South will return them for so doing. It undoubtedly will have a chilling effect on those in the North considering defection.

Respected North Korea observer Lawrence Peck detailed another sin Moon committed...

..."Under South Korean law, North Koreans, with only a few exceptions, are deemed to be citizens of South Korea...

...Of course, while North Koreans are still physically present in the North, they are unable to assert such status as a practical matter, but once North Koreans such as defectors arrive in the South … they are citizens of the South who are able to assert their rights as citizens in a practical manner...

...This means that Moon Jae-in was not only forcibly returning North Koreans to their deaths in the North without due process of law, but that he was also forcing individuals deemed South Korean citizens under South Korean law to be sent back to the North without due process of law."

An American activist for North Korean human rights, Henry Song, noted , "Right now, the defectors are pissed and scared. This case is the matchstick that's lighting the flame. … They are afraid that future defectors or they themselves might be targets if they are accused of crimes in North Korea before they defected."

He added, "There are so many unknowns. Did these men really kill their boat-mates? Where's the evidence?"

Human Rights Watch – an international NGO (non-governmental organization) that investigates and documents human rights violations – believes South Korea's investigation was insufficient. It condemned the repatriation of the two fishermen, claiming it to be "illegal under international law" and criticizing South Korean authorities for not having "thoroughly investigated the allegations."

South Korean prosecutors are now giving the incident the much more in-depth investigation it deserved to determine whether the two fishermen were simply sacrificed as political pawns of the Moon administration's appeasement policy.

Yoon's office has called Moon's act a "crime against humanity."

Knowing what would happen to the fishermen after their return, why would Moon have rushed to judgment concerning what happened onboard the ship, based simply perhaps upon what the North may have asserted, denying them due process and a fair trial, quickly repatriating them?

Human rights activist Song hit the nail right on the head with his conclusion , "(Defectors) are calling President Moon an utter hypocrite. He's known as a human rights lawyer and his motto is 'putting people first,' but this is really about (North Korean leader) Kim Jong-un being put first."

All too sadly, an irresponsible President Moon believed repatriating the two fishermen would earn him the respect of the ruthless dictator Kim. It did not. It only succeeded in giving Kim the satisfaction of knowing he could intimidate his brothers to the South into rolling over.

It was a lesson Moon learned at the cost of two young lives of North Koreans whose only known crime was seeking their freedom.

As bad as Obama's Iran nuke deal was, Biden's is worse!

Thu, 08 Sep 2022 04:02:43 GMT

AS BAD AS OBAMA'S IRAN NUKE DEAL WAS, BIDEN'S IS WORSE!

James G. Zumwalt / September 7, 2021

World Net Daily ... President Joe Biden is close to a nuclear agreement with Iran that would restore much of the framework of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) first negotiated in 2015 by President Barack Obama. While the U.S. withdrew from it in 2018, some of the same ploys Obama used to hoodwink Congress and the American people are being employed by Biden.

It is hard to believe, but as bad as JCPOA1 was, filled with loopholes Tehran fully exploited, Biden's desired JCPOA2 is worse.

While Obama assured us JCPOA1 would prevent the mullahs from ever obtaining a nuclear arsenal, he lied. In fact, it left a clear pathway for them to develop such an arsenal within 10 to 15 years, even if they had abided by it – which they did not.

Also, several side deals were negotiated, which were never publicly revealed at the time. Now that we know how outrageous these deals were, benefiting Iran at America's expense, we know why, as their earlier release would have embarrassed Obama.

Interestingly, back at a time when the media had a little more interest in accurate reporting, the Associated Press discovered one such side deal that allowed Tehran to upgrade and modernize its centrifuges. This enabled it to increase its enrichment capacity before JCPOA1 even expired in 15 years, giving Tehran the capability to build a bomb in half the projected one-year period.

While some terms undermining the JCPOA1's credibility were deemed classified to prevent their release, some unclassified terms were kept secret simply because they were equally as embarrassing.

For instance, kept hidden was the term significantly reducing Iran's pre-existing reporting requirements on its nuclear program. The Iranians became so livid when this detail was revealed by former International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA ) Director General Yukiya Amano that they actually threatened him with harm.

Taking ridiculousness to an extreme was the term addressing IAEA inspections of Parchin – a military compound 35 miles southeast of Tehran where it was believed tests had been conducted on explosive triggers for nuclear weapons. If such tests had been undertaken, an analysis of soil samples would be determinative.

Obama promised this would be done before JCPOA1 was finalized. It was not as, incredibly, a secret deal provided that IAEA inspectors would not collect the samples but the Iranians themselves would! President Ronald Reagan's caution to "trust but verify" was tossed out the window. While samples were supplied, it is anyone's guess from where they came.

However, this term, perhaps more so than any other, underscored for the Iranians just how badly Obama wanted JCPOA1 and the ridiculous accommodations he was willing to make to secure it.

It is clear that Obama so wanted the JCPOA1 to define his legacy that he cared little about the terms. Based on what is now known about the deal, it was and remains no more effective in achieving its intended purpose than did British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's 1938 peace agreement with Germany's Adolf Hitler in preventing World War II.

Yet, much of what the JCPOA1 contained, JCPOA2 will re-implement. Where additional concessions have been needed to get the mullahs to agree, Biden has been most accommodating. This makes his declaration that the U.S. and Israel jointly commit "to never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon" sound hollow.

It also ignores the reality while Iran was not a nuclear state when JCPOA1 was negotiated, it is a threshold nuclear state now.

While Israel seeks to talk sense into Biden, he refuses to meet with Prime Minister Yair Lapid. Ridiculously, this is probably out of concern it might upset the mullahs. Therefore, Israel is sending its usually anonymous intelligence chief to Washington to make its case. Lapid wants a "longer and stronger" deal with Iran, noting that "a bad deal is worse than no deal."

Biden recently boasted that the Iranians dropped a demand which had become a major stumbling block to the deal – removing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the U.S. foreign terrorist organization (FTO) list along with the sanctions accompanying that designation.

As Biden beats his chest about this, he ignores the fact the deal still allows IRGC to freely do business with other parties linked to it. Thus, while the IRGC would retain its FTO designation, it would be able to operate as if it had been delisted.

Some additional concessions by Biden include...

...Committing future U.S. presidents to the deal "as long as Iran remains committed" to it raises a legal issue. To be so binding makes the deal a treaty, mandating two-thirds Senate approval. Of course, Obama did not submit JCPOA1 to the Senate as a treaty, by calling it an executive agreement , only requiring a simple majority vote to pass.

Just like Biden redefines today what a recession is to avoid having to admit we are in one, Obama redefined what a treaty was to avoid requiring a two-thirds Senate vote.

...Unlike JCPOA1, JCPOA2 does not enable participants (the U.S. or EU3, consisting of England, France and Germany) to reinstate sanctions on Iran unilaterally if the mullahs are believed to be violating the deal.

The U.S. will halt any investigation into Iran's past nuclear activities....While Iran seeks America's destruction as the "Great Satan," it gives destructive priority to Israel. And, as a co-resident of the Middle East neighborhood, Israel has a lot more immediate worry about a nuclear armed Iran than does America.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu minced no words in condemning JCPOA2. He said it "is a horrible deal, and a dangerous deal. It will pave Iran's path with gold and put them on a highway to a nuclear missile."

Mr. Netanyahu added that it's worse than JCOPA1 because "it gives Iran the time they need to develop added enrichment of uranium with 3,500 centrifuges. It gives them hundreds of billions of dollars, and at the end of the deal almost a trillion, and it does not ask anything of them."

Apparently not content to leave $83 billion in military equipment, training and aid behind in Afghanistan, Biden now seeks to fund Iran's nuclear weapons program as well. Rest assured, Biden's deal bodes well for the future of Iran's entire military-industrial complex.

Additionally, just like JCPOA1 gave the mullahs cash to fund its terrorist proxy activities , so too will JCPOA2 with little money benefiting the Iranian people.

Other factors Biden seems to disregard concerning such an agreement include Tehran's extraterritorial efforts to assassinate American citizens; its lifting of sanctions on those responsible for the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing that killed 241 U.S. military personnel; opposition of several Arab states to the agreement; etc.

Biden is accused of giving the "top state sponsor of terrorism (1) unlimited nuclear weapons; (2) no inspections past, present or future; (3) the missiles to deliver them; (4) enriched uranium to be held by Russia and returned to Iran or wherever they both decide;" and (5) "$100 billion per year to spread terror around the globe."

As one critic notes , "Giving Iran nuclear capabilities and a trillion dollars (in sanctions relief) is just about the dumbest possible thing America can do right now."

Forrest Gump was right, "Stupid is as stupid does."

A more equitable student loan forgiveness plan

Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:15:10 GMT

A MORE EQUITABLE STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS PLAN

James G. Zumwalt / August 31, 2022

World Net Daily ... It is human nature's call for fairness that brings us to the issue of President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan, seeking to benefit students who received loans, regardless of their current financial situation, by forgiving those loans up to an amount of $10,000 ($20,000 for Pell grant recipients).

One example of the plan's outrageousness is that it covers loans obtained by parents as well with eligibility, again, based on the student's income. In other words, parents making huge incomes can qualify even though their graduated child may now be back at home, living in the basement.

While clearly there are many students who have achieved financial stability and are fully capable of paying off their loans, there are also those who have not yet established such stability. But it is estimated only 15% of Americans will qualify for the plan of which most already are in the upper-middle class.

Thus, the issue of equity arises – fairness in not only ensuring student debtors truly in financial need benefit from loans being discharged but also fairness to taxpayers in ensuring their tax dollars benefit such students and not the upper-middle class. The bottom line is Biden's plan makes the American taxpayer covers – to the estimated tune of $2,100 each – the private debts of individuals.

The plan places an annual income cap of $125,000 on those eligible for the program. Fortunately, this eliminates from consideration those like Alexandra Ocasio Cortez (AOC) who, despite her socialist ideology, is making a very capitalistic annual income of $174,000.

Clearly, AOC, doing well financially, rightly should not so benefit. After all, she was able to buy a $59,000 Tesla, which she randomly parks illegally and for which she even now has the leisure of considering a trade-in due to her political sensitivity over Tesla founder Elon Musk's recent conservative conversion.

But despite AOC and other congressional members not qualifying, it is estimated at least 30 members of Biden's White House staff, collectively owing $4.7 million, will. As such, one critic calls the proposal "shameful" evidence of "the gap between the people and the ruling class in Washington, D.C."

Sadly, while in the shorter term, non-student loan taxpayers will foot the bill for this forgiveness, even those benefited fail to understand they will suffer a longer-term negative impact in the form of increased cost of government, inflationary price rises and the burden of a $30 trillion national debt.

Student loan forgiveness beneficiaries will recognize too late they were victims of Biden's plan.

Some day, perhaps, the reality will sink in that they only served as conduits for transporting over a trillion dollars in taxpayer money to a liberal academic community – many already with billion-dollar endowment funds – to promote the Democratic Party's ideology.

Yet, for playing this role, students have faced tuition increases and the need for larger loans. (Hint: Perhaps college endowments, which are untaxed, should pay off the bad loans.)

Little attention is paid to the fact that several years ago as Obamacare was making its way through Congress, a provision was included to eliminate private student loans by federalizing the system. Not widely understood then was the hope of raiding funds paid by students to help fund Obamacare.

In 2013, the Congressional Budget Office reported that $8.7 billion of the funds collected in student loan interest payments went to Obamacare, $10.3 billion went to the federal debt and $36 billion went to pay Pell Scholarship grants, resulting in students paying higher interest rates.

While the plan's total financial impact is officially put at $300 billion, other estimates suggest it could go as high as $500 billion. It may even be higher as, in 2019, it was estimated 44 million borrowers collectively owed $1.5 trillion in student loans – the second highest consumer debt category behind mortgages.

Whatever the student loan amount is, at a time the U.S. economy is struggling...

...inflation is rearing its ugly head, billions of dollars is being committed to help Ukraine defeat its Russian invader, and a misnamed $739 billion "Inflation Reduction Act" is passed that will not do what its title suggests, the last thing we need to do is implement a student loan forgiveness plan that includes those who have truly benefited from their loans to win good-paying jobs.

Six days after announcing his plan, Biden still refuses to share how he intends to pay for the debt cancellation while claiming it is "fully paid for" through deficit reduction.

When Vice President Kamala Harris was asked who specifically is footing the bill, she responded in her typical non-responsive manner, "The same people who are criticizing what we rightly did … are the same people who voted for a tax cut for the richest Americans."

A more equitable way existed for Biden to structure a plan based on real financial need. Fairness to taxpayers at a time our national bank account is being depleted absolutely demanded this.

However, by announcing his plan just two plus months before midterm elections and polls showing Democrats in real trouble, Biden needlessly chose to benefit more debtors than only those in most need.

To explore a more equitable solution, we need to review bankruptcy law.

Before 1976, student loans could be discharged in bankruptcy, at which point the law gradually changed. By 2005, the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act exempted federal and private student loans from discharge, reasoning students could obtain such loans, intending to earn a degree and then declare bankruptcy to avoid payment.

However, exemptions existed for discharging loans by proving undue hardship – basically demonstrating an inability to make loan payments while maintaining a minimum standard of living. This remains the standard today.

A more equitable solution would use a "fast lane" process in bankruptcy courts, to which special student loan adjudicators were assigned to evaluate the financial needs of those attempting to discharge their indebtedness.

Applicants would submit affidavits, listing all assets and liabilities to show the applicant's finances exceeded a predetermined debt ratio level. Any affidavit involving fraud would result in reinstatement of the debt plus other penalties.

Those lacking financial need know who they are and, as such, would be unlikely to submit to this bankruptcy process, possibly running the risk of a false submission. This would help weed out many unqualified applicants.

Additionally, since Biden has now extended a freeze on federal student loan payments for a full year, through Dec. 31, conveniently until after midterm elections, it would have given qualifying applicants ample time to submit paperwork.

Such a student loan forgiveness plan would give taxpayers a comfort level, knowing their tax dollars were going to those in real need.

Biden has had 20 months to think out his student loan forgiveness plan. Like so many other decisions his office has made, adequate timing seems unlikely to generate thoughtful planning.

At a time when the gap between "haves" and "have nots" in our society is so wide, fairness dictates benefitting the latter, to include all taxpayers, to the exclusion of the former – something Biden ignores in an effort focused on buying votes for the midterm elections.

As one critic says about the plan, "It is profoundly immoral to transfer the privately incurred debts of some onto the backs of all taxpayers. …" But then, immorality seems to be a generational characteristic within the Biden family.

Something is rotten in the state of America

Thu, 25 Aug 2022 16:27:45 GMT

SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN THE STATE OF AMERICA

James G. Zumwalt / August 24, 2022

World Net Daily ... In 1940, outnumbered 3 to 1, the Royal Air Force took to the skies to defend England against Nazi warplanes seeking to establish air superiority in the pivotal World War II Battle of Britain. The Germans failed to do so.

Addressing the House of Commons later, Prime Minister Winston Churchill eloquently praised his country's air warriors stating , "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few."

While those Royal Air Force pilots proved what a few courageous men could do to save a nation, we are now witnessing in America how a few power-hungry individuals can destroy one. Despite America surviving over two centuries of wars involving enemies both foreign and domestic, never in the field of human conflict has so much of a republic's destruction been inflicted by so few.

There is one key element imperative to America's continuing survival – the need to keep and maintain public trust. In fact, " trust is the foundation of a functioning democratic system. "

It includes maintaining trust by: a voting system cleansed of practices lending themselves to fraud, thus denying voters the confidence to know their vote truly does count; governmental institutions and those employed therein acting accordingly; and all law enforcement agencies demonstrating a continuing commitment to perform their mission, devoid of party politics and loyalties.

Today, almost six out of 10 Americans lack confidence in election integrity. In 1964, the Supreme Court of the United States decided the Reynolds v. Sims case, " establishing the principle of 'one man, one vote.'" However, clearly several events occurred during our 2020 presidential election that caused a majority of Americans to question whether that is what happened.

Voters went to bed election night with President Donald Trump holding a seemingly insurmountable lead, only to have it miraculously disappear as absentee ballots hauled in late to voting centers and ballots – video-taped being stuffed into collection boxes – were tallied, swinging the count in Joe Biden's favor, helped also by voting machine issues.

A close presidential election occurred in 2000 between then Vice President Al Gore and former Gov. George W. Bush, resulting in "hanging chads" on Florida ballots, which ultimately determined its outcome.

This led to a bipartisan commission on federal election reform. The commission's establishment was absolutely necessary to restore public confidence in our voting system.

However, no similar bipartisan federal election reform effort was launched following the 2020 election to identify and correct the issues encountered. While 14 states have passed legislation to improve election integrity, a lot still remains to be done.

And now various politicians are undermining the integrity of our federal institutions. Among these are SCOTUS, which has been relentlessly attacked for simply doing its job in issuing decisions based on our Constitution's parameters and overruling others that were extra-constitutional.

And then there's the Department of Justice, which subjected a former opposition president to a raid – seeking classified documents while not even allowing him to monitor the search – and the FBI, which has steadily exposed a partisan liberal core targeting conservative thinkers.

The undermining of SCOTUS is particularly egregious, as the public loss of confidence in the highest court in the land presages worse things are to come. Foremost among SCOTUS critics is President Biden.

But even SCOTUS, whose members historically made decisions without criticizing fellow court members extrajudicially for opposing views, has violated that rule. Liberal Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor further sparked criticism by suggesting , after Roe v. Wade was overturned, SCOTUS would not "survive the stench" of following politics rather than precedent.

But the 1896 racist decision Plessy v. Ferguson supporting "separate but equal" facilities is only one example of bad precedent. SCOTUS overturned it almost six decades later in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. Some leftist constitutional scholars are now suggesting we should toss the Constitution entirely.

As for the FBI, its partisan leanings were seen clearly in communications between two FBI agents assigned to investigate the Trump-Russia collusion hoax – Peter Strzok and his bed partner, fellow agent Lisa Page.

They said they had to "find" evidence proving his guilt. The two lovebirds were assisted in this effort by a gaggle of other pro-Hillary Clinton FBI agents on the same investigative team with but one purpose – to get Trump.

One can just see this pro-Hillary team of "independent" law enforcement investigators licking their chops to get Trump. They had previously demonstrated their keen investigatory skills by building a non-case involving Hillary's most recent scandal.

She was investigated for allegedly transmitting classified material over an unsanctioned email carrier and other transgressions. Their investigative report basically determined "there is nothing here to see, folks, so keep moving."

Of course, this conclusion was only reached after FBI Director James Comey wrote a report describing Hillary's actions in the exact verbiage necessary to meet the criminal standard (from "gross negligence"), only to change it (to "extremely careless") after Agent Strzok interceded to point out this "error."

Additionally, Hillary, although questioned by agents, unbelievably, was never put under oath and was queried with other of her staff members present despite being relevant to the investigation.

It was also after Hillary had ordered her staff to destroy their cell phones and undertake the "drastic cyber-measure" of using the open source cleaning software product BleachBit to wipe systems "so even God couldn't read them" – despite an outstanding court order not to do so. Yet, the pro-Hillary FBI investigative team shockingly found she committed no crime.

Interestingly, the operation to raid Trump's home was led by the same FBI bureau chief not only involved in the Russia collusion hoax but the one who also botched the plot instigated to supposedly kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. A Newsweek report suggests the raid's real focus was to find documents exonerating Trump from involvement in the Russia collusion story.

A post-raid poll indicates 53% of Americans now believe "a group of politicized thugs exist at the top of the FBI who are using (it) … as Joe Biden's personal Gestapo."

The fact that 14 FBI whistleblowers have now stood up to condemn their agency's politicalization suggests the troops have become restless over their leaders' misguided political course change.

A line memorialized from William Shakespeare's 16th century play "Hamlet" is "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark." The line's meaning is debated, but the clearest interpretation is that all is not well atop the political hierarchy.

With regard to the 2022 midterm elections, if they do not result in Republicans regaining both the House and Senate, then "something is rotten in the state of America."

Rushdie attack offers a dose of Islamic reality

Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:33:56 GMT

RUSHDIE ATTACK OFFERS A DOSE OF ISLAMIC REALITY

James G. Zumwalt / August 17, 2022

World Net Daily ... It is always intriguing to hear liberal advocates suggest a course of action be taken that conservative voices have long heralded. Liberal television host Bill Maher has repeatedly promoted leftist positions. But, in light of progressivism that has moved the Democratic Party far to the left, Maher's opinions seem to have shifted to the Right side.

Maher is still left but closer to the center. As is often the case for liberals, a dose of reality has been necessary to do so.

Liberals, like atheist Maher, have long demonstrated an intolerance for Christianity, despite it being a foundational belief upon which our Founding Fathers built America. Our Constitution prohibits government support for any one religion for the purpose of avoiding creation of a "state religion."

Liberals have done everything possible to keep Christian beliefs distinctly separate and apart from government.

When Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., a Muslim, took her oath of office, choosing to use the Quran rather than the Bible in January of 2019, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had a 181-year ban against members wearing headcoverings lifted to allow the Somalian-American legislator to wear her traditional headscarf.

The ban was originally imposed in 1837 to move away from the British custom of wearing hats.

It is interesting that Pelosi saw Omar's entry into the House as an opportunity to showcase a tolerance of Islam. One wonders whether it dawned on Pelosi that what she saw as an act of tolerance was viewed entirely differently by Omar.

As a Muslim, Omar embraces the Quran's teaching that Islam stands above all other world religions. Accordingly, Islam divides the world into two parts – "Dar-al-Islam" (abode of Islam) and "Dar-al-Harb" (abode of war).

Dar-al-Islam consists of all countries where Islam rules as the superior religion with other religions subordinate to it, evidenced by the mandate those other religions pay a tribute known as "jizyah." Dar-al-Harb is Islam's war zone, i.e. where Islam seeks to establish itself as the superior religion.

Apologists for Islam suggest the war Islam calls for is ideological and not a violent one. While many non-violent Muslims may believe this as well, the danger for the West is that Islamists promote just such a violent interpretation, even to the point of murdering fellow Muslims who oppose their beliefs.

We should never forget how ISIS left a major bloodstain across the Middle East as it massacred thousands of Muslims including gays , men, women and children . To ISIS, such Muslims were infidels deserving of such a fate.

Islamists' violent intentions for all other religions cannot be made any clearer. All Muslims, including Omar, believe Islam is the superior religion and, therefore, view the lifting of the head-covering ban in Congress as acceptance of Islam's superiority to all Western religions.

Ironically, while these other religions recognize they exist independent of governmental endorsement, for Islam there is no separation of "church and state." One is integral to the existence of the other. Where Islamic religion exists separately, Dar-al-Harb demands Islamic leaders and believers eventually achieve governmental control.

This is what happened in Iran in 1979 when the shah was toppled by the people. While they had hoped doing so, allowing the mullahs to take power, would create a "kinder, gentler" government, it left them with a far more brutal regime – an Islamist theocracy.

Despite the mullahs' brutality demonstrated both inside and outside Iran's borders, most American liberals have turned a blind eye to their Dar-ul-Harb (war) intentions. So committed are the mullahs to the global rule of Islam, they will do whatever is necessary to achieve it, even killing Islam's critics. This is why in 1989, after author Salman Rushdie wrote "Satanic Verses" criticizing Islam.

The immediate reaction of Iran was to place a $3 million bounty on his head for blasphemy.

On Aug. 12, 2022, Rushdie was attacked by Hadi Matar, 25, in Chautauque, New York, as the author took the stage to give a speech. Rushie survived the attack, although he has a long recovery time ahead of him. Matar's parents, who are Lebanese, divorced in 2004. While his father moved to Lebanon, Matar grew up with his mother in New Jersey.

She claims her son was a good Muslim until 2018 when he took a trip to the Middle East to visit his father. Upon his return, Matar told his mother he was unhappy she had "encouraged him to get an education instead of focusing on religion." He came home radicalized after having established contact with members of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Maher, who is good friends with Rushdie, condemned the attack, saying it raises the need to debate the "dangers of Islam" – a suggestion conservatives have strongly supported.

Dismissing the typical claim liberals make against Islam's critics as being Islamophobic, Maher says closer review of the religion is warranted by the Rushdie attack since the author had good reason to be fearful of it.

Maher explained, "Islam is still a much more fundamentalist religion than any of the other religions in the world, and that means they take what's in the holy book seriously and that has been dangerous for a long time. It's still dangerous."

The assassination attempt on Rushdie provides a dose of reality for the hatred Islamists promote against blasphemers, apostates, gays, infidels and anyone else denying Islam's supremacy.

While for Matar, the attempt may well have been both financially motivated by Iran's bounty and by what he learned from the Quran, there is another dose of reality we should take away from this would-be assassin's quick transition to radicalism...

...that no matter how believers may interpret the Quran – whether giving it a violent or non-violent spin – that holy book has every potential to become a license to kill for any and all Muslims triggered into doing so.

Biden praises Japan's low gun-crime rate – in a vacuum

Thu, 11 Aug 2022 12:00:12 GMT

BIDEN PRAISES JAPAN'S LOW GUN-CRIME RATE...IN A VACUUM

James G. Zumwalt / August 10, 2022

World Net Daily ... President Joe Biden, who has never failed to demonstrate a certain insensitivity, saying the wrong thing at the wrong time, did not disappoint critics in the wake of the assassination of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

The body of the prime minister was still warm when Biden decided to take advantage of the situation for a purely political purpose.

Abe was gunned down during a campaign speech on July 8 after which Biden raised the issue of gun control in the U.S. While Biden did extend his condolences to the Japanese people, he also praised the country's strict gun control laws.

Not only does Biden seem oblivious to the fact that even in a country with strict gun control laws, those laws did nothing to prevent the shooter from carrying out his evil intent.

Also oblivious to Japan's gun control history, Biden exclaimed , "One thing did strike my attention that this is the first use of a weapon to murder someone in Japan and I think we have thus far have 3,000 … don't hold me to the numbers … 688, or between three to four thousand cases; they have one."

Biden is correct that Japan, for the most part, is not plagued by evildoers brandishing guns. A country of 170 million has been successful in almost completely eliminating gun deaths, reducing them to 10 per year. Contributing to this is Japan's implementation of a battery of tests applicants must pass before gaining access to a small pool of guns.

However, gun control laws did not deter those in Japan dedicated to killing from doing so – and where they have, other ways have always been found to achieve the same end.In 1995, the colorless and highly toxic nerve gas sarin was released into Tokyo's subway system by a domestic terrorist group, killing 13 and injuring 5,500.

In 2021, Japan recorded almost 700 murders – a figure which has declined to 318 in 2020. But what cannot be ignored is the credit due to a fully funded police department.

Unlike Japan – where a robust police force enjoys public support, thus trending Japan's murder rate in the right direction – Biden ignores a trend in the wrong direction in the U.S. as a result of Democrats' support for defunding police.

Another factor in Japan's low murder rate is the purity of its population. Japan is listed as being among those countries having the toughest immigration laws. Thus domestic unrest based on conflicting cultures has been avoided.

But perhaps most significant in Japan is a tradition that has been deeply ingrained upon the Japanese people. Whether imposed upon them by emperors before World War II or freely opting for it after World War II as a democratic nation, Japan has long remained a structured society.

The Japanese have long been influenced by " Bushido " which is the code of honor of the samurai warrior. It has been embedded within the cultural DNA of Japanese citizens for centuries and remains so today. It is this code of honor that has been witnessed by the outside world time and again after natural tragedies have struck Japan.

While hit with devastating earthquakes and tsunamis, destroying homes and businesses, these occurrences seem not to unleash looters or other criminals to prey upon society.

Japanese society has learned to place great importance upon factors America used to cherish, such as loyalty, politeness, personal responsibility and everyone working together for the greater good. Highly valued are traits such as hard work, education, ambition, patience and determination.

So dominant was the honor code engrained upon Japan's citizenry, there were stories of their soldiers stationed on islands during World War II committed to never surrendering. They had been taught that the code did not permit surrender, and so isolated were they that they did not know Japan had surrendered. Accordingly, they continued to patrol the jungles as ordered.

Many may well have perished on these islands, unknown but to God. The last known soldier to finally return home surrendered in 1974 – 29 years after the war ended.

Another factor to consider in Japan's successful gun control today are the limitations imposed upon it as a defeated nation when World War II ended. All personal weapons had to be surrendered to U.S. forces. Additionally, a Japanese military that had demonstrated such brutality as it swept through Asia was neutered as far as having any capability to threaten the outside world again.

The country's military today is strictly limited to a defensive role.

There are so many factors that have come into play enabling Japan to achieve such a low murder rate involving guns. But it is outrageous for Biden to tout Japan's gun control laws in a vacuum as the sole factor in this achievement. If he truly wants to see the U.S. accomplish the same success, he should be challenged to mirror what Japan has done.

Of course, this will never happen as doing so would run afoul of so many convictions, such as open borders, that the Democrats would adamantly refuse to reject.

With Zawahiri hit, Biden proves the broken-clock principle

Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:12:39 GMT

WITH ZAWAHIRI HIT, BIDEN PROVES THE BROKEN-CLOCK PRINCIPLE

James G. Zumwalt / August 3, 2022

World Net Daily ... Sometimes by flipping a coin the question of "common probability " arises, especially when multiple flips ensue. But the chances of a coin landing heads instead of tails or vice versa is always 50%. Each act of coin flipping is an independent one, with no greater influence on the third flip being tails just because the first two were heads.

Likewise, even if a gambler flipped a coin that consistently landed on the same side many times in a row, causing the gambler to think he was "on a roll," the chances will always remain 50/50 of a different outcome on the next flip. To believe the chance of a certain outcome of the flip is greater than 50/50 based on past performance is simply gambler fallacy.

As we examine the consistently wrong decisions President Joe Biden has made since taking office, especially on a foreign policy level, believing the gambler fallacy might not be a fallacy gains credence.

Whether it was the Afghanistan withdrawal or opening our borders to illegal immigrants or stopping U.S. oil production, etc., Biden was consistently making one wrong decision after another.

It has taken 18 months into Biden's term for us to see the other side of the coin in his supposed decision-making. The results of that decision occurred the last weekend of July. Ironically, Biden had opposed a similar decision 11 years earlier while serving as vice president under Barack Obama.

On July 30, at 9:48 p.m., Ayman al-Zawahiri – a 9/11 mastermind, medical doctor and al-Qaida leader – made the mistake of stepping out onto the balcony of the building where he was awaiting the arrival of his family in Kabul, Afghanistan. After years of searching for the terrorist, he had finally been found.

His location was being closely monitored by the CIA, which only awaited a final prescription for the physician via Biden giving the go-ahead. With that prescription in hand, the CIA sought to fill it with a drone carrying two Hellfire rockets. In what was described as "a precise tailored airstrike" causing no other casualties, Zawahiri met his demise.

Note: it was Vice President Biden who, in 2011, counseled against a raid to take out Osama bin Laden who had been found hiding in a compound in Pakistan. Fortunately, Obama chose not to take Biden's advice and authorized the raid in which Zawahiri's terrorist cohort was eliminated as a future threat. Biden later lied about not giving such counsel before ultimately fessing up to having done so.

The assassination of Zawahiri has provided the first positive face to Biden's clueless foreign policy decision-making.

He is fortunate enough to be able to lay claim to it as a success simply by virtue of occupying the Oval Office at the right time. After all, the search for Zawahiri had been ongoing under every previous president since 9/11. Undoubtedly, Biden also learned his lesson from calling the bin Laden raid wrong.

Biden's decision to give the green light to kill Zawahiri may have been by concerns over not repeating his earlier mistake.

Zawahiri was a living contradiction. As a physician supposedly committed to saving lives, he wrote a 1998 manifesto stating , "To kill Americans and their allies – civilian and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in every country in which it is possible to do it."

This mentality led to his masterminding the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, killing 224 while injuring thousands more, and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, killing 17 Americans.

Biden said of Zawahiri's death, "Justice has been delivered, and this terrorist leader is no more. We made it clear again tonight that no matter how long it takes or where you hide, if you're a threat to our people, the United States will find you and take you out."

While a win for Biden, Zawahiri's death leaves us no safer. Afghanistan – the country from which Biden chose to withdraw last year leaving the Taliban in power – has now become a safe haven for al-Qaida, which is just as determined as ever to kill Americans – a sentiment shared with the Taliban.

There is another positive foreign policy development for which Biden "may" lay claim, although he exercised bad judgment in how he went about it. The word "may" is applicable as we remain uncertain about the outcome of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Taiwan trip.

While America stood up to China's bullying by Pelosi going, there still may be consequences of her having done so. Biden's involvement again was mostly on the sidelines.

Pelosi announced she would visit Taiwan during her trip to Asia. Biden and the military advised against it, but Pelosi, being Pelosi, brushed aside such advice, making the trip. This was also done despite a threat from China to shoot her aircraft down or to undertake other aggressive action.

Pelosi became only the second House speaker to visit Taiwan – a quarter century after Newt Gingrich did so in 1997.

It is clear there was little effort made by Pelosi and Biden to mutually agree upon such a visit before the speaker flagrantly violated the guidance of a president from her own party. This was a slap in the face to Biden, undermining his credibility as his party's leader and leaving the international community wondering who, if anyone, was in control of the U.S. government.

While Biden proclaimed the U.S. did not support independence for Taiwan, Pelosi released a statement suggesting America supports democracy there.

Perhaps finally accepting Pelosi would not toe his line, Biden eventually caved in, proclaiming she had the right to visit Taiwan and the U.S. would not be intimidated by China.

Losing face, particularly when an Asian nation feels victimized by a Western power, is deemed an egregious sin that cannot go unpunished. We have yet to see what cost China will extract from the U.S. for Pelosi's end run of Biden. We can only pray it does not come at the cost of American or Taiwanese lives.

Some experts believe one possible outcome is that China's timetable for exercising its game plan, which has always included bringing the island under Beijing's control, has now been expedited by Pelosi's visit.

Despite the success of the Zawahiri attack and possible success of Pelosi's Taiwan visit, Biden is not "on a role." But "common probability" tells us that we're in store for many more of Biden's bad foreign policy decisions.

Pelosi's foreign policy initiatives: Good ideas badly executed

Sat, 30 Jul 2022 22:31:13 GMT

PELOSI'S FOREIGN POLICY INITIATIVES: GOOD IDEAS BADLY EXECUTED

James G. Zumwalt / July 29, 2022

World Net Daily ... By 1979, Saddam Hussein had completed his coup, taking over as president of Iraq. He was a man who was both feared and revered. As an autocrat, he made his own decisions, never needing to seek out the counsel of others. And these others recognized the price they would pay should they ever disagree with him.

Today in America, we have just such a person in a senior government leadership position, acting autocratically. First elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1987, this member of Congress has continued to serve for three and a half decades.

She became the first female speaker of the House in 2007 under President George W. Bush, stepping down from that position in 2011 when Republicans regained control of the House, only to reimpose herself upon the speakership a second time, in 2019, where she so serves today.

When it comes to taking actions impacting upon our country's foreign policy, she has proven to be a loose cannon regardless of whether the president in office was a Republican or a Democrat.

Three months after becoming speaker on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi was already knocking heads with Bush over U.S. foreign policy.

She decided to go to Syria – a country that supported attacks by terrorist groups Hezbollah and Hamas against Israel, had created a revolving door for Iraqi militants in Syria to go into Iraq to undermine that fledgling democracy and was known to be involved in efforts to destabilize Lebanon. Pelosi announced that her intent in Syria was to meet with its dictator, President Bashar al-Assad.

Bush advised Pelosi not to make the trip as it would undermine administration efforts to isolate the hard-line Arab country. He was concerned too that such a visit would falsely signal that Assad's government was part of the international mainstream. Furthermore, Assad had previously made promises to undertake certain actions to help stabilize the region, but always failed to do so.

Undeterred, Pelosi went anyway. Upon her return, she delivered encouraging words about Assad, saying he had assured her of his willingness to engage in peace talks with Israel. Fifteen years later, we have yet to see any such peace talks undertaken.

Despite having a member of her own political party in the Oval Office now, it appears Pelosi is still guided by her autocratic ways. The fact that she now announces she will be traveling to Taiwan – a decision not only President Joe Biden suggests is ill advised but so too does the military – would indicate she failed to discuss such a visit beforehand with Biden.

Clearly, with tensions brewing between the U.S. and China over the island nation's continuing independence, nothing unnecessarily should be done to rock the boat.

To her credit, Pelosi has long been a critic of China which, obviously, has not endeared her to the regime there. She once unfurled a banner on Beijing's Tiananmen Square to memorialize the 1989 bloody crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators and also supported the 2019 pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

She undoubtedly sees her making a visit to Taiwan now as delivering a slap in the face to Beijing.

Regardless of this, however, out of party loyalty, especially when Democrats do not hesitate to criticize fellow Democrats for acting independently, she should have quietly requested authorization from Biden to make the trip before announcing she would. This has resulted in China now threatening "strong measures" in retaliation should she do so.

While both Biden and the military have now publicly criticized Pelosi's trip decision, canceling it will score a small victory for China as its bravado will be viewed as having caused a course change by the speaker.

Pelosi has needlessly and senselessly poked the Chinese dragon which now threatens an "extremely serious" attack against the U.S. military at a time we have a totally inept president in office to deal with such confrontation. Ironically, this is the same China that then presidential candidate Joe Biden in 2019 dismissed as posing any kind of a threat.

Speaker Pelosi has stranded us in a no-win situation in which we will either lose face by backing down or quite possibly lose American lives by not doing so.

Not content to rile up China alone, it appears Pelosi may have taken additional action without consulting Joe, seeking to impact our foreign policy against Russia as well.

In a phone call with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Pelosi warned should the State Department fail to take steps to identify Russia as a sponsor of terrorism, Congress would do so. The State Department's authority to declare rogue nations as state sponsors of terrorism was a power Congress imbued to it several years earlier.

Pelosi purportedly told Blinken, and rightly so, that Russia is "far overdue" in being so designated. But, as one critic points out, such a designation "introduces risk into any interaction with Russia."

Good ideas demand good execution to remain good ideas. This principle was never of any concern to Saddam Hussein whose major focus was mostly on executing political opponents.

While this writer has often been in disagreement with Pelosi's actions, her ideas concerning actions against China and Russia are admittedly good ones.

Even so, her execution leaves a lot to be desired. Clearly in times of such tensions between the U.S. and China as well as the U.S. and Russia, execution of ideas involving them need to be closely coordinated with the serving president, regardless of party affiliation.

Not only is it a courtesy owed the office, the advice given by that office also rates serious consideration as the lives of our military could needlessly be put in harm's way without such coordination.

Unfortunately, an autocratic Pelosi failed to grasp the basic understanding that even a good idea badly executed is a bad idea.

For Neanderthals, gender was simple – today? Not so much

Thu, 28 Jul 2022 12:35:20 GMT

FOR NEANDERTHALS, GENDER WAS SIMPLE; TODAY, NOT SO MUCH

James G. Zumwalt / July 27, 2022

World Net Daily ... Concerning the gender issue, life was so much more simple 40,000 years ago, which was before the Neanderthals died out.

After all, the words in the 1970 song bearing the name "Neanderthal Man" tell us our prehistoric ancestors had no issues concerning gender identity. The song's first stanza keeps it all simple:

I'm a Neanderthal man

You're a Neanderthal girl

Let's make Neanderthal love

In this Neanderthal world

Clearly, although Neanderthals harbored a less developed brain, they saw the world as having only two genders – males and females – with each eventually becoming equipped with a supposedly much more capable brain.

But, tens of thousands of years later, in 2022, gender identity has become a complicated issue. This is evidenced by the stupefying messages of witnesses who testified before congressional committee hearings earlier this year.

The question "what is a woman" never seemed complicated, first coming to light during the March confirmation hearings of President Joe Biden's nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Asked by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., "Can you provide a definition for the word 'woman,'" Brown responded, "No. I can't. … I'm not a biologist."

Of all social issues that have undergone reexamination during man's history, this particular one appeared to have been settled long ago. Forty millennia ago, they never had to seek out another opinion to determine one's gender.

But not only did Judge Jackson's liberal response to Sen. Blackburn's question cloud a concept that has served man and woman well throughout history, it also demonstrated a clear liberal hypocrisy raised after SCOTUS overruled the 49-year-old Roe v. Wade decision giving women the right of abortion.

Liberals argue Roe v. Wade was "settled law" and, as such, was not subject to change. However, by making that argument, they ignore that a much longer precedent has existed for tens of thousands of years that man is man and woman is woman and never the twain shall meet.

In July, University of California, Berkeley School of Law professor Khiara M. Bridges testified on the abortion issue. During her testimony, she consistently avoided using the term "women," instead opting for "people with a capacity for pregnancy." When Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., sought clarification of this, he asked, "Would that be women?"

In responding, Bridges incorporated the term "cis gender" women, meaning women who identify with their biological sex.

Accordingly, she answered Hawley's query with, "Many women, 'cis women,' have the capacity for pregnancy. Many cis women do not have a capacity for pregnancy. There are also trans men who have the capacity for pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy."

Hawley next asked, "So this really isn't a women's right issue …" to which Bridges responds, "We can recognize that this impacts women while also recognizing that it impacts other groups. Those things are not mutually exclusive. …"

This exchange then followed...

Hawley: "So your view is that the core of this, this right then is about what?"

Bridges: "I want to recognize that your line of questioning, um, is transphobic, um, and it opens up trans people to violence by not recognizing that. …"

Hawley: "Wow, you're saying that I'm opening people up to violence by asking whether or not women are the folks who have pregnancy?"

Bridges: "So I want to note that one out of five transgender people have attempted suicide, so I think it's …"

Hawley: "Because of my line of questioning? So we can't talk about it?"

Bridges: "Because denying trans people exist and pretending not to know they exist …"

Hawley: "I'm denying that trans people exist because I am asking you if you are (talking) about women having pregnancies?"

Bridges: "Do you believe that men can get pregnant?"

Hawley: "No, I don't think so."

Bridges: "So you're denying trans people exist."

A critic of Bridges' testimony later wrote the obvious : "Pressure is building to force people to pretend that crackpot ideas are sane."

It is interesting that Bridges chose her testimony before Congress to make such a political show by avoiding the term "woman" or "women" – something she apparently decided to do only after Judge Jackson had raised the gender identification issue at her hearing.

For, in a 2020 law review article Bridges wrote, she saw absolutely no need to do so, unhesitantly relying on the old Neanderthalic terms "woman" and "women" 45 times and 349 times respectively.

Sadly, college campuses are also promoting gender identity, requiring students in class introduce themselves to provide their preferred pronouns. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, recently mocked this requirement at a rally in which he provided the following introduction: "I'm Ted Cruz and my pronoun is kiss my ass."

The senator partially blames academia for instigating this radical gender ideology. In reference to liberals' inability to define something as easy as what a woman is, Cruz issued a "trigger warning" for any snowflakes in the crowd before stating "women exist."

The audience obviously loved it when Cruz, referring to the sanity of gender identity issue promoters, blurted out, "What the hell is wrong with you idiots?" Cruz obviously is one who appreciates the more simple Neanderthal mentality when it comes to gender identity, adding, "This stuff ain't complicated."

One would not realize it is not complicated based on a recent resolution proposed by the largest teachers' union in the country – the National Education Association (NEA). It ridiculously proposed that, in any contracts it issues, the term "mother" be replaced with "birthing parent" to promote inclusivity.

Such a mindset by the NEA should not give any parent with young children in school a warm and fuzzy feeling about what is being taught there.

The introduction of this gender identity complication must be most confusing for Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii. She went on record during Judge Brett Kavanaugh's SCOTUS confirmation hearing to make a very sexist comment about women who testified against him, espousing how females should always be believed.

However, the introduction of this new gender complication raises a question: If testimony given by a biological woman and transgender woman are at odds, whom is the senator to believe?

Even though Neanderthals possessed a far less developed brain, methinks they had a much better understanding of the gender identity issue than we have today. We, ridiculously, have allowed gender identity to devolve into the equivalent of a Heinz 57 variety product line.

Who would have thought thousands of years of progress would leave homo sapiens lacking the simple common sense embraced by Neanderthals?

Biden's Cabinet is bare of constitutional patriots

Sat, 23 Jul 2022 11:24:58 GMT

BIDEN'S CABINET IS BARE OF CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIOTS

James G. Zumwalt / July 22, 2022

World Net Daily ... The setting for Shakespeare's play "Richard III" is during the Wars of the Roses – a series of bloody conflicts between two competing royal families for the English throne. Villainous Richard, having lost his horse in battle, is left on foot to fight from a position of weakness.

He dies, uttering the words , "A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse." Those words revealed a willingness to surrender something of much greater value for something of immediate need but of much less value.

As one reflects upon the questionable actions and behavior of President Joe Biden since taking office, suggesting he lacks competence, we cannot ignore the failure of his Cabinet officials to accept the solemn responsibility they have under the Constitution.

We do not know whether their inaction is due to a willingness to surrender something of much greater value (our republic) for something of immediate need (their jobs) but of much less value.

Their inaction suggests we have a Cabinet laid bare of constitutional patriots interested in preserving our republic. Such inaction puts our nation in grave danger as Biden may soon exercise a decision that would maximize his executive power.

While one may ignore Biden's continuing gaffes and forgetfulness, there is no way to ignore his lengthy record of wrong domestic and foreign policy decisions. Their combined negative impact on America's prestige and our economy is appalling. They include...

A disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that left behind billions of dollars of weaponry making the Taliban a threatening military force, while he falsely claimed no one warned him about the negative consequences such a complete withdrawal could have.

Biden-created hyperinflation plaguing an American economy that may well now be entering a recession.
Implementation of an oil policy that has removed America's capability to remain oil independent, leaving us dependent upon less than friendly foreign oil suppliers while devastating our economy.

Senselessly draining our all important Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) – our energy backup in case of war or domestic disruption – at a time America is moving closer to the possibility of foreign conflict.

Shipping 6 million gallons of SPR oil to China – a nation responsible for unleashing the coronavirus upon the world – which now threatens America should it provide defensive weaponry to Taiwan or should House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visit the island nation next month.

Ignoring concerned Americans that his son Hunter holds a 10% interest in the Chinese oil company receiving the SPR oil.

Opening up our borders to an illegal immigrant invasion coming at a major cost in American lives, further creating economic stress and an enormous drug problem...

...not to mention the fueling of disrespect for the Supreme Court of the United States based on its recent overturning of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that erroneously claimed a woman had a federal right to abortion while encouraging abortionists to protest against the Court in violation of federal law.

While the above list is not all inclusive, it should suffice to raise concerns among Cabinet officials.

A former White House doctor tells us he questions Biden's cognitive ability. We were told by Robert Gates, one of President Obama's secretaries of defense, that Biden has been wrong about top foreign policy issues for decades.

Regardless of whether President Biden's incompetency is an extreme result of the Peter Principle or mental deficiency is immaterial at this time, as he considers the step of declaring a national climate change emergency that would imbue him with the equivalent of dictatorial powers.

It is said that in A.D. 64, the despised Emperor Nero " fiddled while Rome burned." Whether true or not, the expression refers to a totally ineffective leader in a time of crisis.

We need to accept the fact Biden is a 21st century Nero who is on the verge of crowning himself emperor.

Proclaiming a climate change emergency would give Biden unilateral authority to basically do whatever he deems necessary to combat climate change, including pulling money away from defense to fund construction of renewable energy products.

The White House announced, "The president made clear that if the Senate doesn't act to tackle the climate crisis, he will. We are considering all options."

As one worried critic notes , "What Biden is preparing to do means effectively the end of the separation of powers and, in effect, a move from a constitutional republic to a monarchy."

Additionally, Biden recently was diagnosed with COVID-19. There is no telling what further impact such a diagnosis will have on a president in an already physically and mentally deteriorating state.

Meanwhile, Biden has gone into hiding while nothing appears on his schedule.

While impeachment action against Biden may well be taken by Republicans should midterm elections give them both a House and Senate majority, that may prove to be too late.

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution provides that "the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration...

...that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office."

Receipt of this declaration then puts responsibility on Congress to resolve whether the president should be removed from office.

Because Cabinet action is needed quickly before a Biden "coronation," there is no time to impeach our even less competent vice president the way Spiro Agnew was replaced by Gerald Ford in 1973.

While congressional members on both sides of the aisle will have concerns about bringing Kamala Harris, the most unpopular vice president in 50 years, to the Oval Office, they need to quickly identify a new vice presidential candidate to serve under her, with an eye toward that person eventually replacing President Harris.

As bad as Kamala Harris is and would certainly welcome doing a " twofer " impeachment, we can ill afford to have Space Cadet Biden exercising dictatorial powers.

We can only hope a majority of Cabinet officials recognize failing to take action under the 25th Amendment quickly to remove Biden will not bode well for the future of our republic.

Wrongly awarding Pulitzers means never having to say you're sorry

Thu, 21 Jul 2022 01:02:04 GMT

WRONGLY AWARDING PULITIZERS MEANS NEVER HAVING TO SAY YOU'RE SORRY

James G. Zumwalt / July 20, 2022

World Net Daily ... i t's now widely accepted the allegations that presidential candidate Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election were falsely made as part of a defamation campaign launched by Hillary Clinton.

The allegations went far beyond the dirty tricks politicians are known to play – going on to impair Trump's presidency.

Trump remained the target of critics believing he was not legitimately elected. Playing a major disinformation role in the Russian hoax were two publications – the New York Times (NYT) and Washington Post – that were subsequently recognized for their "contributions" by the Pulitzer Prize Board.

In 2018, praising the two papers for national reporting, the board awarded them a Pulitzer "for deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation's understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect's transition team and his eventual administration."

Despite findings more recently coming to light that no Trump/Russia collusion occurred, which true "deeply sourced, relentless" reporting should have revealed, the tribute above to the two newspapers remains memorialized on Pulitzer's website, with the NYT and Washington Post proudly acknowledging the award as a badge of honor and good journalism.

On May 27, 2022, Trump sent a letter to the Pulitzer Board as follows...

...There is no dispute that the Pulitzer Board's award to those media outlets was based on false and fabricated information that they published. The continuing publication and recognition of the prizes on the Board's website is a distortion of fact and a personal defamation that will result in the filing of litigation if the Board cannot be persuaded to do the right thing on its own."

Trump's letter caused Pulitzer to engage two independent sources to review the matter. It claims these two sources, acting separately, arrived at the same conclusion, i.e., "that no passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes."

What Trump will do in response to Pulitzer's refusal to revoke the awards remains to be seen.

By way of background, the Pulitzer Prize is the result of an endowment by newspaper magnate Joseph Pulitzer in 1917 to recognize outstanding reporting. It has come to be highly esteemed, being awarded every May since 1917. Awards are made by Columbia University upon the recommendation of a Pulitzer Prize Board of judges appointed by the university.

To its credit, the NYT has now received 133 Pulitzer awards. This is more than any other publication. In second position to the Times is the Washington Post, which has received 65 Pulitzers. However, for the NYT, it is not the first time the newspaper has received an award despite questionable reporting.

In 1932, Pulitzer granted the NYT an award for a series of dispatches written by Walter Duranty. He was head of the newspaper's desk in Moscow where he wrote about the Soviet Union's Five Year Plan. That series failed to report on a major failure of the program in the form of a 1932-1933 famine, which claimed the lives of an estimated 5 million people (1 million Russians and 4 million Ukrainians).

Duranty helped feed Soviet leader Josef Stalin's propaganda machine by suppressing the truth. He covered up the death count, writing , "there is no actual starvation or deaths from starvation."

Fake news won the NYT a Pulitzer which, after Durranty's false reporting was exposed, the Pulitzer Board twice declined to revoke.

We are now living in an era of fake news reporting, reflected by the fact that recent polls show public trust in the media has hit an historic low. Only 16% of adults in America say they have "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in newspapers.

Some newspapers have taken positive steps to root out fake news and heighten accountability. USA Today recently removed 23 articles from its website after an internal investigation revealed a reporter had fabricated quotes.

But this, unfortunately, is more the exception than the rule. Pulitzer's refusal to accept accountability for wrongly awarding prizes only encourages fake news "fiction" writers to continue their ways as they know a Pulitzer may be their ultimate reward.

If Pulitzer is not going to demand such accountability, it then falls to the newspapers that inappropriately received the awards to take some kind of action. Sadly, returning the Pulitzers will not happen. Nor can we hope to see minimal accountability in the form of a simple asterisk on their websites acknowledging the award's faulty foundation of truth.

How long will it take to restore the public's faith in journalism? However long it takes for journalists to realize they must take positive steps to restore honesty and integrity in their profession.

While woke activists have managed to put a pox on our Founding Fathers and others for not eradicating slavery, far more people died from the 1932-1933 famine Duranty knew about but failed to report.

One would think these activists, ever respectful of human life, would therefore push to honor the unreported famine casualties by demanding the newspapers relinquish their Pulitzers.

The Pulitzer Prize Board should be setting a corrective course for journalism in America. Failing to withdraw awards for false reporting does not do so.

As long as it embraces the attitude of wrongly awarding a Pulitzer means never having to say you're sorry, there is little hope such a course correction will be quickly undertaken.

Democrats embrace 'Hypocritical Oath' with overturn of Roe

Sat, 16 Jul 2022 02:08:27 GMT

DEMOCRATS EMBRACE "HYPOCRITICAL OATH" WITH OVERTURN OF ROE

James G. Zumwalt / July 15, 2022

World Net Daily ... While the Greeks gave the West its first ethics oath, one applicable to members of the medical profession known as the "Hippocratic Oath ," politicians today seem to embrace a very different oath – one lacking an ethical mandate – which we will call the "Hypocritical Oath."

Liberal politicians are especially adept at "honoring" this oath, as most recently demonstrated by disciplinary action taken against retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Gary Volesky.

Volesky, a Silver Star recipient for gallantry in Iraq – whose combat experience was sought out post-retirement to mentor senior officers and students on issues related to wargaming and other military matters – was given a consulting contract with the U.S. Army's Combined Arms Center.

That contract has now been suspended , pending the results of an investigation into a posting Volesky made appearing to mock first lady Jill Biden after her post concerning the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to overturn Roe. v. Wade.

As Roe v. Wade had recognized a woman's right to abortion under the Constitution, Jill Biden wrote: "For nearly 50 years, women have had the right to make our own decisions about our bodies. Today, that right was stolen."

Volesky's tongue-in-cheek response was, "Glad to see you finally know what a woman is."

The general's comment alluded the hearing of SCOTUS nominee Kentanji Brown Jackson in which she refused to define what a woman is in keeping with the liberal-lemming mindset non-biological males can be "birthing people." However, it is asserted that Volesky's comment was a breach of traditional military decorum by which retired officers are not to speak out on partisan political matters.

Volesky's reprimand reeks of hypocrisy if one considers not only what Jill Biden wrote, but what President Joe Biden has said and where he said it.

Our Founding Fathers obviously designed our government to function on the basis of three independent branches, with checks and balances built into the Constitution to limit unfair overreaching by any one branch. Of the three branches – executive, legislative and judiciary – the judiciary has boundaries imposed upon it that the other two do not.

As the executive and legislative branches are free to exercise whatever "creativity" they can get away with to accomplish an objective, it is SCOTUS that is charged with responsibility for determining the validity of the laws these two branches generate.

Thus, for any contested laws coming before it, SCOTUS must determine whether legal justification for their existence is supported, supposedly within the four corners of the Constitution. If nothing within the Constitution's wording supports a law, such as abortion, the document clearly reserves the right of the states to resolve the issue.

In other words, as Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., has put it, justices must "live and breathe the Constitution," which means overturning Roe vs Wade was appropriate in allowing states to decide whether or not to ban abortion.

However, the Roe v. Wade decision violated this principle. The abortion issue improperly triggered the creative juices of the 1973 SCOTUS members to read into the Constitution a right that was not there.

They did so by stretching the meaning of the "due process" clause – precluding arbitrary deprivation of "life, liberty or property" to citizens – thus claiming it included a personal right for women to abort before fetal viability was reached. Such a stretch was dangerous as it opened the door to include numerous other rights never intended by the Constitution's wording.

Of the three branches, the judiciary is supposedly the most non-political – a position becoming more difficult to defend over time. Its history does have some dark spots.

The 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson, in which the high court held racial segregation laws did not violate the Constitution, accepting the "separate but equal" doctrine, was one.

This remained the law for almost six decades until the 1954 SCOTUS case of Brown v. Board of Education overturned it, just like was done with Roe v. Wade earlier last month, as bad law. SCOTUS determined "'separate but equal' had no place" in public education, calling segregated schools "inherently unequal."

Public confidence in our government, and most especially the judiciary, is imperative if society is to function according to the rule of law. While Jill Biden's post did nothing to promote this, her claim of theft also was wrong.

The Supreme Court has not "stolen" abortion rights from women; it has simply said such authority is not within the Constitution's wording to grant and, therefore, has to be determined by the individual states. Thus, pro-abortionists must now wage their battle at the state level.

Seeking to further stoke the fires of anti-SCOTUS sentiment, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra irresponsibly implied the five justices overturning Roe went rogue just to make women suffer.

Primarily due to such irresponsible attacks, public confidence in SCOTUS dropped to 25% this year – ironically still coming in 18 percentage points higher than public confidence in the Congress trying to undermine it.

But more disturbing than Jill Biden's comments about overturning Roe v. Wade are Joe Biden's comments.

Coming from a president whom, after a year and a half in office, has been so wrong on so many fronts, we should take zero confidence from his statement that he believed the 1973 SCOTUS had made "the correct decision as a matter of constitutional law, an application of the fundamental right to privacy and liberty in matters of family and personal autonomy."

True to his hypocritical oath, this is the same Joe Biden who, as a senator in 1982, signed a failed constitutional amendment allowing the states to overturn Roe v. Wade and make their own abortion decisions – which is exactly what the 2022 Court has done!

But back then he argued the '73 SCOTUS had gone "too far," claiming, "I don't think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body."

Despite this, on July 8, Biden signed an executive order directing HHS to "take additional action to protect access" to abortion pills. It remains to be seen if this allows HHS to circumvent state laws banning the pills, but it allows Biden to toss pro-abortionists a crumb.

Biden outrageously claimed the Dobbs decision "was not a decision driven by the Constitution … not a decision driven by history. … What we're witnessing wasn't a constitutional judgment. It was an exercise in raw political power."

Meanwhile, he is establishing an abortion task force to explore how "to protect access to reproductive healthcare" and looking into declaring abortion a "public health emergency" to do so. In a totally unpresidential move, he encourages more protests.

But the president's most egregious action concerning the SCOTUS decision occurred on July 1 as he addressed our NATO allies in Europe, having the audacity to criticize the Court there. While it is an unspoken rule politicians, and most certainly our president, should never air our dirty laundry overseas, Biden attacked the Supreme Court for its "outrageous behavior."

It is the height of hypocrisy to criticize Gen. Volesky for having a bit of fun online at the expense of Jill Biden and liberal wokeism, while holding neither her nor Joe responsible for their derogatory comments that undermine SCOTUS.

If anyone is guilty of breaching decorum, it is the president and the first lady.

Lincoln's 'house divided' and our disrespectful ingrates

Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:24:26 GMT

LINCOLN'S "HOUSE DIVIDED" AND OUR DISRESPECTFUL INGRATES

James G. Zumwalt / July 13, 2022

World Net Daily ... On June 16, 1858, after being selected by the Republican Convention to run for an Illinois U.S. Senate seat as tensions over slavery between North and South were mounting, Abraham Lincoln delivered his famous "House Divided" speech, cautioning, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

July 4, 1858, marked the 82nd anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence by the 13 colonies, marking their July 4, 1776, commitment to become an independent nation. But Lincoln wondered how many more Independence Day anniversaries would be celebrated by a united America.

A bloody civil war ultimately raged between April 12, 1861, and May 9, 1865, becoming America's deadliest conflict in history, claiming an estimated 620,000 lives.

Ever since that day in 1776, there has always been a certain reverence about the July 4th date. Interestingly, three of our first five presidents (and Founding Fathers) died on that day.

Both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson passed on July 4, 1826, while James Monroe died on July 4, 1831. Our fourth president, James Madison, almost made it to that pinnacle date as well, dying a week short of it, on June 28, 1836 – the last surviving signatory of the U.S. Constitution.

The Fourth of July also came to have special significance to Lincoln during the American Civil War. It is that date, in 1863, that many scholars consider the conflict's turning point. Two important Northern victories were tallied on that day – the Battle of Gettysburg and the Fall of Vicksburg.

With such history and import attached to July 4th, it is not a date to be disparaged. However, in an America today that is the most divisive it has been perhaps since the Civil War, there were those who felt it necessary to do so, desecrating the country and flag so many American patriots cherish.

One of these was Poet Laureate Amanda Gorman. A black activist who does not hesitate to play the victim card, she became the youngest poet , in 2021, to recite her work at a presidential inauguration.

Apparently, in search of the spotlight again, Gorman chose this past Independence Day to achieve a liberal's dream trifecta, mocking our country, our flag and our national anthem.

Her Independence Day work bastardized our national anthem with the following opening . (Note: Be forewarned this "poem" was written by a 24-year-old adult and not a child):

O say can we see, by the Gone's early flight,

What so loudly we failed at the mornlight's past gleaming,

Whose flawed stripes and strifed scars, through the perilous plight,

Our wan hearts, we watched, stirred and valiantly screaming.

U.S. Army veteran Joseph Raymond Goulet passed away on July 4, 2022, at age 99. He was in the first wave of the World War II Allied invasion force to land at Omaha Beach in Normandy, France. One can only hope Goulet, who was courageously fighting his way across France at the age of 21 – three years younger than un-American poet Gorman is now – died before ever hearing about her poem.

It would have been heartbreaking for him to learn he was leaving behind an ungrateful younger generation lacking any sense of patriotic unity for the country he loved so much. Although living alone to the end, he undoubtedly had heard about those of Gorman's ilk who were doing so much to destroy the country.

There were 16 million veterans who served in World War II. It is estimated that less than 240,329 were surviving as of 2021. With the youngest of these in their 90s, we are losing approximately 1,000 each day. One of the surviving veterans, who turned 100 on June 29, 2022, broke down in tears during an interview saying that what America has become is "not what they (his fellow soldiers) died for."

Silver Star recipient Carl Spurlin Dekel explained , "People don't realize what they have. … The things we did and the things we fought for and the boys that died for it, it's all gone down the drain. Our country is going to hell in a hand basket." He lamented, "We haven't got the country we had when I was raised, not at all."

Dekel is not alone in how he feels about America. Respondents of a Pew poll earlier this year overwhelmingly agree, as a whopping 78% are dissatisfied.

Meanwhile, as liberals still call for defunding police, little recognition is given to the important role police continue to play in containing what is readily becoming a lawless America along the lines of the old Wild West. A mass shooting that was supposed to occur July 4 did not, as police acted on a tip, arresting two illegal aliens who had collected a cache of weapons for the attack.

Interestingly, some of those who have actively jumped on their soapboxes to denigrate America are, perhaps, now recognizing, despite its problems, America is the least worst country among the global community.

Topping this list of regretful ingrates most probably is American basketball player Brittney Griner who spent this Independence Day in a Russian jail cell after pleading guilty to smuggling drugs into the county. Facing up to 10 years in prison, she is pleading with the U.S. State Department to help get her out.

This is the same ingrate who decided not to respect the national anthem at her games by remaining in the locker room until it ended – all to protest the death of the criminal Geroge Floyd during his arrest for yet another crime.

And finally, one liberal author, seeking to spoil this year’s Independence Day for us wrote an article entitled “July Fourth is a sham–Only reparations can make it real.” The author cited a quote by Frederick Douglass–a 19th century African American abolitionist and author who had escaped slavery–taken from his 1852 Fourth of July Speech .

That quote is one liberals often use to suggest Douglass held antipathy for America. However, they do so by failing to put the quote into the context Douglass intended.

In his speech, while he queried, “What to the American slave is your Fourth of July?,” delivered when slavery still existed, it was actually an affirmation that the Declaration of Independence and principles of the nation’s founding were still redemptive in his hope to end slavery.

We need to heed Lincoln's 1858 warning about a house divided. It is clear today our divided house is in desperate need of repair and reunification. It is doubtful this will be achieved by a disjointed Congress.

It will only be achieved by American voters making their position clear this November. Doing so hopefully will enable us to enjoy next Independence Day free of the contemptuous disrespect we have witnessed this year.

Gun-control activists ignore what a sixth sense tells us

Thu, 07 Jul 2022 17:03:37 GMT

GUN-CONTROL ACTIVISTS IGNORE WHAT A SIXTH-SENSE TELLS US

James G. Zumwalt / July 6, 2022

World Net Daily ... As humans evolved, intelligence enabled them to grab top spot on the food chain. Despite having done so, we lack special sensitivities some animals have developed over the years to survive.

Evolution has given birds, discerning air pressure changes ahead of storms, the instinct to seek safety; sharks, sensing water pressure changes ahead of hurricanes, to dive deeper to avoid surface impact; and wild animals, sensing an inbound tsunami, to seek refuge further inland.

Though recognizing such sensitivities within the animal kingdom, mankind seems to ignore a sixth-sense similarity to discern the place a mass shooter will most likely select as a "killing field" – by an overwhelming margin. Because we ignore this, we foolishly create the very environment the shooter finds most inviting.

Just like Ivory soap guarantees its product is 99.44% pure, there is an almost equally high guarantee as to the location a shooter, hellbent on committing mass murder, will choose.

In fact, it is with 97.8% certainty , the location selected will be one designated as a "gun-free zone." The obvious reason is the desire to commit the crime, devoid of any risk of deadly interference.

Yet anti-gun activists lack a sixth sense recognizing that, to a shooter, a gun-free zone is a clear welcome sign.

By creating gun-free zones, we fail to sensitize ourselves to the fact the vast majority of gun owners, again by an overwhelming margin, are safety conscious, responsible individuals lacking any sinister intent to use such a weapon.

Yet gun owners, because they are law-abiding, will disarm before entering into such a zone, ironically allowing themselves to become potential victims should they enter the wrong gun-free zone at the wrong time.

Just like a sign on a bank door reading "Our security guards are unarmed" would drastically increase the likelihood such an institution would experience a robbery, the same is true of buildings with signs proclaiming "This is a gun free zone."

Potential mass shooters must be left guessing whether anyone inside a targeted building is armed.

The historical gap time between the first access to repeat-fire guns and the first mass shooting should also trigger a sixth sense that users traditionally use such weapons safely.

While guns have been a part of our history since the Revolutionary War, multi-shot assault weapons, developed as early as 1791, were unavailable to the U.S. military and civilian population until the early 19th century.

Thus, the capability to commit mass shootings – defined by the FBI as the killing, by one shooter, of four or more victims, not including the killer, within a short period of time – has existed for over two centuries.

Credited with the first mass shooting in U.S. history involving victims unrelated to the shooter was Howard Unruh, 28, in 1949. His 12-minute "Walk of Death" killing spree through his neighborhood claimed 13 victims, including three children.

As it took over a century and a half for such a weapon to be involved in a mass shooting, logic dictates the obvious – guns lack evil intent. However, the June 29 shooting of a young mother, pushing her baby in a stroller when she was shot point-blank from behind, has been outrageously blamed on the "over-proliferation of guns."

Common sense dictates that the evolution of repeat-fire guns as a mass killing tool is linked to the user's evil intent alone.

Thus, seeking to restrict access to these weapons despite their lengthy peaceful history is not the proper tact to take in addressing the issue today. Yet liberals not only seek to do so but also to hold gun manufacturers legally liable when mass shootings involve their products...and this raises an interesting question.

The first murder, according to the Bible, involved the son of Adam and Eve – Cain – who killed his brother Abel in a jealous rage. While there is some debate over the weapon used, it is believed to have been a knife-like object.

Therefore, in an anti-gun activist's ideal world where guns have been totally eliminated, causing mass killers to resort to Cain's weapon of choice, would anti-gun advocates then seek to hold knife manufacturers responsible for the deaths of such victims?

Vehicles too have been used as a weapon of choice to inflict mass casualties, so, here again, is legal liability to be imposed upon automobile manufacturers to hold them responsible?

We are faced with an inconvenient truth. Whether it is a gun, a knife, a vehicle, etc., none becomes a mass casualty weapon absent the evil intent of the person wielding it.

Accordingly, the potential to make any object a murder weapon in a mass killing demonstrates the futility in seeking to address mass shootings by infringing upon the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, as Democrats are now attempting to do – whether banning a specific weapon type, like the AR-15, or making gun ownership more strenuous.

A study by George Mason University reveals that states with fewer gun control laws and more gun owners do not trigger higher murder rates than states with more gun control laws and fewer gun owners. In fact, the study reveals just the opposite, with the "poster child" city for such higher murder rates being Chicago.

Strict gun laws have resulted in most such murders obviously being committed by what our sixth sense should tell us – shooters wielding illegally obtained guns.

Another argument liberals raise is that concealed carry threatens public safety and that people do not really need firearms. They suggest gun owners are actually more at risk having firearms in their residences and that gun ownership results in more murders.

We need only look at what happened the evening of July 3 in New York City to undermine this argument.

As a holiday gathering was taking place, two men began shooting at the crowd. Fortunately, a hero – an off-duty corrections officer who was able to pull out his concealed weapon – was present, preventing mass casualties while wounding both attackers.

Our sixth sense should therefore tell us that people looking to do others harm will always seek out and find the means for doing so, creating the need for responsibly trained and armed citizens who, hopefully, are in the right place at the right time to protect the public. Such heroes should also cause evildoers to think twice about the possibility armed protectors might be out there.

Until we start tuning into our sixth sense, mass shootings will remain a sad reality of life.

Pro-aborts target children on both ends of the birth canal

Thu, 30 Jun 2022 00:38:02 GMT

PRO-ABORTS TARGET CHILDREN ON BOTH ENDS OF THE BIRTH CANAL

James G. Zumwalt / June 29, 2022

World Net Daily ... On June 24, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) officially published its Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision – a case challenging Mississippi's 15-week abortion ban. The decision overturns the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade arguing that women had a constitutional right to abortion.

The Court's action comes as no surprise since on May 2 a draft had been leaked to the media. While the hunt for the leaker continues, a 5-4 SCOTUS majority now overturns Roe v. Wade.

The leak had lit a fire under pro-abortion activists who had demonstrated with a vengeance, believing they not only had some superior right to negatively impact our judicial system but also to negatively impact the lives of children on either side of the birth canal.

SCOTUS history may well include times when the Court, voting one way initially, later shifted based on further discussions among members, swaying a different outcome. But, if so, all this was done in-Chamber, obviously before an official decision was issued.

However, the timing of the Dobbs leak suggested that point in time had already passed as the majority remained committed to upholding the ban. Why else would the leaker – who clearly opposed overturning Roe v. Wade – risk a career to leak the opinion?

While it was clearly timed to maximize outside pressure on the majority justices already committed to overturning Roe v. Wade, it failed to do so.

Following the leak, pro-abortion groups immediately organized protests at the Supreme Court building as well as the homes of conservative members – the latter after their addresses were posted online. Despite such protests being in violation of federal law, a liberal-minded U.S. attorney general, Merrick Garland, refused to enforce it.

That law clearly states it is a crime to protest "in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge" with "the intent of influencing any judge." Failing to enforce it only emboldened further action, such as an armed leftist extremist arrest for trying to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

What is very disturbing is despite the federal law, high-profile political leaders such as President Joe Biden , former first lady Michelle Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., irresponsibly praised pro-abortionist activists, encouraging continuing protests. And this was done as House Democrats rejected additional SOCTUS protection.

It is telling that these liberals believed their criminal actions or their encouragement thereof would result in justices, committed to interpreting the law based on the U.S. Constitution and having already done so in the Dobbs case, being intimidated into changing their decision the 1973 Court overstepped its jurisdictional authority by weaving into the Constitution a woman's right to abortion where the document is completely silent on the issue.

The Dobbs decision simply mandates a badly needed course adjustment concerning the legality of abortions as a constitutional right, rejecting federal authority to determine the issue and, as per the Constitution, leaving it to the individual states to decide.

Amendment X of the Constitution is clear about this, stating , " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "

Pro-abortion activists apparently believed they could undermine the Court's credibility and commitment to honor our Constitution, forcing it to weave a non-existent right of abortion into the Constitution.

They failed to recognize that historically SCOTUS, despite being composed of the leading legal minds of the time, has also been susceptible to human error, demanding a subsequent course adjustment be taken when any such error is recognized.

This is exactly what happened to the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson in which the high court ruled racially segregated facilities were legal as long as they were equal for both blacks and whites.

That, like Roe vs Wade, stood as the law of the land for decades until a later Supreme Court recognized that mandating separate facilities by race for education and other services did not meet the meaning of constitutional equality.

Thus, Plessy v. Ferguson was overturned by SCOTUS in 1954 in the landmark civil rights case of Brown v. Board of Education. The 1896 SCOTUS had erred, and the 1954 SCOTUS corrected it.

Just as 1954 SCOTUS sought to erase bad law that was the result of flawed logic, so too does 2022 SCOTUS. From their protests, however, pro-abortion activists ignore the fact the Dobbs decision did not ban abortions per se – it simply mandates authority for determining the legality of abortions lies with the individual states – not the federal government.

Some pro-abortionists believe because Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land for decades, it should stand.

But such an argument, applied to Plessy v. Ferguson, would have left "separate but equal" facilities for blacks and whites in place as the law of the land today.

What is most disturbing about the pro-abortion activists who have opposed Dobbs is witnessing the extreme to which their anger turns a blind eye to embracing simple human decency – their criticism attacking the most innocent of victims.

Obviously, by pushing their stance, pro-abortionists not only have demonstrated zero concern for the sanctity of human life in the womb, supporting an abortion procedure that literally rips an unborn child apart, but have also have demonstrated no hesitancy in targeting children on the other side of the birth canal as well.

For in their protests, pro-abortionists have also maliciously included the children of conservative justices.

One pro-abortionist group tweeted out details about the daily schedule of Justice Amy Coney Barrett's family, noting where her seven children attend school and that Barrett attends church "DAILY." Telling too is the fact this information was posted within hours after the Kavanaugh assassination incident.

In another despicable act, pro-abortionists felt it necessary to send a "special message" to Kavanaugh's wife and two daughters. They posted a photo of a billboard near the school, attended by the Kavanaugh children, that stated , "A special message for Ashley Kavanaugh and your daughters – This billboard was on your school grounds. We feel for you."

In a further example of how Dems treat young children this side of the birth canal, a video is making the rounds of Pelosi's outrageous behavior in " elbowing " the young daughter of Rep. Mayra Flores, R-Texas, during a photo op at her swearing-in ceremony on June 26.

It was clearly not an incidental act but an intentional one as Pelosi consciously looks down at the child before gently but purposefully elbowing her aside. To the little girl's credit, she immediately moved back into her original position, unperturbed by the "wicked witch of the House."

It is outrageous that liberals, largely dismissive of Hunter Biden's life as a social miscreant, remain silent about him while unhesitatingly drawing Kavanaugh's innocent children into their line of fire. It' a sad commentary about society today.

Pro-abortionists, feeling so totally self-righteous in the cause of killing the unborn, now callously seek to draw innocent children into the dispute, absolutely undeterred by the limits of basic human decency.

Father's Day at the Bidens

Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:53:41 GMT

FATHER'S DAY AT THE BIDENS

James G. Zumwalt / June 22, 2022

World Net Daily ... India's Mahatma Gandhi – lawyer, politician, social activist and writer who led the nationalist movement against British rule – lived his life in accordance with the creed : "Live as if you were to die tomorrow; learn as if you were to live forever." Winning independence for his people, Gandhi died in 1948 at age 78, felled by an assassin's bullet.

As fathers and sons across the country celebrated Father's Day last Sunday, there is one son in particular who had no clue as to what Gandhi meant by his creed. While embracing the "live as if you were to die tomorrow" part – twisted to meet his own selfish needs – he obviously ignored everything after that.

Clearly relishing his role as "First Son," Hunter Biden has enjoyed the benefits that come with that position, plus many more that did not. It has brought him more in life than he ever dreamed possible. Whether drugs, prostitutes, guns, nefarious international dealings, cash, etc, Hunter has lived life as if there were no tomorrow, all dedicated to his self-seeking search for endless pleasures.

One can only wonder what was discussed last Sunday at the Biden family dinner table on Father's Day, celebrated in Delaware – a place the president seems to be spending more time on weekends than the White House. We need do so in the context of how Joe views

Hunter, having previously boasted Hunter was "the smartest person I know."

It is interesting Joe made such a declaration about his son even after Hunter, perhaps still on a high, failed to pick up his laptop computer containing extremely damaging information about the Bidens.

It had been left at a repair shop where the shop owner had legally taken ownership of it for nonpayment, and then accessed its contents. Publicly released in bits and pieces, the contents have proven to be a gift for Biden critics that keeps on giving.

The contents of the laptop paints a dark picture of a presidential son totally uninhibited in doing whatever he so desires, regardless of how it might reflect upon the Biden family.

Cheating on his wife, cheating on his dead brother's widow with whom he had an affair, keeping a prostitute on the payroll, – if it felt good, Hunter did it. The revelations keep getting darker and darker – some even revealing about Joe himself. For example, Hunter had a passion for internet pornography and shared some of what he accessed with his father.

As the existence of the laptop popped up prior to the 2020 presidential election, the liberal media worked hard to hide the story. They were assisted in this effort by 51 intelligence " experts " who assured the voting public the laptop was not Hunter's but part of a Russian disinformation campaign to embarrass Joe.

A subsequent thorough examination, however, determined with 100% certainty the laptop is, indeed, Hunter's, totally discrediting the Russian disinformation explanation. Yet these 51 so-called experts have since refused even to apologize for being wrong.

While Joe has often said he never inquired about Hunter's business dealings, inevitably the "laptop from Hell" tells a different story.

Hunter's email exchanges concerning various deals suggested certain percentages had to be set aside for "The Big Guy." There were indications too that Hunter used his questionable financial gains to pay for some expenses incurred by Joe.

The latter's financial records indicate he earned $5.2 million in unexplained income, raising questions about its sourcing.

Additionally, a Dec. 3, 2018, 77-minute audio clip from the laptop has Hunter boasting about the influence he has over his father. "He'll talk about anything I want him to," Hunter bragged. He added, "If I say it is important to me … (Joe will) make it a part of his platform." If his father is elected, Hunter said he would take on the gun control issue and "any other things I want him to (discuss)."

Describing Joe as "the man I admire most," Hunter could not end without some self-aggrandizement, adding, "He thinks I'm a god." One gets the clear impression that in this father/son relationship, Hunter is the puppet-master and Joe the puppet.

With laptop revelations still emerging, the Biden family's Father's Day dinner table discussion concerning the infamous computer must have been intriguing.

Did father criticize son for being totally irresponsible about abandoning the laptop, or was father thanking son for securing a "percentage" for the old man

With Joe's mental state questionable, was he even cognizant of the fact Hunter has been a total disgrace to the Biden name? If he was cognizant, did he lock eyes upon the son he views as a god despite the fact that the son's personal greed has brought so much dishonor to the family?

Or does Joe really have a much greater grasp of Hunter's dealings?

Was there no criticizing Hunter as father, son and other Biden family members who have all benefited from Hunter's financial escapades relished in their bounty while laughing over Joe's "I know nothing" scam?

What an opportunity it would have been to be a fly on the wall at the Biden family's dinner table.

In 1996, first lady Hillary Clinton published "It Takes a Village" – a book chronicling her quest, both personal and public, to help transform society into the kind of village enabling children to become smart, able and resilient adults. Clearly, the book was never read by Joe Biden.

Sadly, Joe's endless incompetence as a father, exhibited so baldly by the fruit of his loins, is mirrored by the grossly inept presidential leadership plaguing America today.

Nancy Pelosi's belief system sucks

Sat, 18 Jun 2022 17:12:19 GMT

NANCY PELOSI'S BELIEF SYSTEM SUCKS

James G. Zumwalt / June 17, 2022

World News Daily ... In the Marine Corps, life's priorities were emphasized with the earliest training. They were succinctly set forth with just three words, "God, Country, Corps."

This belief system defined who we were, not only as Marines but also as Americans, listing what we valued above all else.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., obviously never served in uniform. However, one would have hoped her lengthy career in politics would have ingrained within her a belief system having similar priorities. Sadly, we see nothing reinforcing this based upon her actions to date.

In fact, evidenced by her most recent actions, it is clear not a single of the three beliefs listed above would make her top three list. Frankly, she embraces a belief system that sucks.

While one can understand her list not including the Corps, it is troubling to acknowledge it would include neither God nor Country, as Pelosi seems to be driven by one belief only – the power of her political party.

There is no more obvious indicator concerning her rebuke of God in favor of political party power than her dismissing the sanctity of life, especially as a Catholic, to promote abortion for women. This, of course, assumes she can define who is a woman as some members of her party seem unable to do so.

Obviously holding a position that is contrary to her church, it was not until this year that Pelosi's disregard for the life of the unborn caused her to be disciplined by her archbishop.

While a socialist Pope Francis was remiss in not punishing Pelosi's unholy political stance on abortion, the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco, Salvatore J. Cordileone, had seen enough of her favoring political party over the teachings of the church.

While the pope continued to turn a blind eye to Pelosi's defiance, the archbishop decided, after her unsuccessful effort in the House to codify the doctrine of Roe v. Wade, to take action.

Recognizing the grave evil Pelosi was perpetrating, the scandal within the church she was creating and his numerous failed efforts to explain to her the dangerous risks to her own soul she was ignoring, he took the step of declaring she was not to receive Holy Communion at any church within his jurisdiction.

Despite Pelosi's support for abortion, she calls herself "very Catholic." Such a claim is ludicrous as she dodges questions about whether she agrees with the position of Pope Francis and Pope Saint John Paul II that "abortion is murder."

There is precedent for Cordileone's action, so he fully believes his decision was "pastoral" rather than a "political" one. Additionally, since taking such action, Catholic leaders in Colorado sent a letter out to pro-abortion state legislators who are church members to voluntarily not participate in Holy Communion.

A poll taken last year among Catholics who attended Mass revealed 74% believe public officials who defy the church's teaching on abortion should not so participate.

Pelosi, being Pelosi, did take Holy Communion although not at a church in Cordileone's jurisdiction. It will be interesting to see whether she eventually does try to do so.

In another action undertaken recently by Pelosi, she has now demonstrated, as if she has not in the past, a lack of belief in Country, again for purely political gain.

Pelosi is supporting a New Mexico Democratic congressional candidate by the name of Gabe Vasquez who is running for a seat now held by a Republican. Obviously, Pelosi would support her party's candidate. However, Vasquez is not a candidate of whom any American should be proud.

Vasquez has denounced the U.S. as "AmeriKKKa" – an attempt to suggest the country is racist – although, ironically, he uses KKK (Ku Klux Klan) to do so, a racist group that evolved due to the late 19th/early 20th century anti-black policies of his own Democratic Party. He fails to appreciate American history, which tells us the first 23 blacks elected to Congress were all Republicans.

Vasquez also favors defunding law enforcement, outrageously calling to replace them with psychologists. This political neophyte additionally claims there is a need to tear down and rebuild an economic system that has served us well for centuries.

Unsurprisingly, Vasquez is a supporter too of Black Lives Matter – an organization that has been used to make its founders and friends rich while doing little to promote much else. He claims, "Until we deconstruct and rebuild the systems of oppression that keep black people in perpetual harm, justice will not be served.

That includes law enforcement, the economy, and the disgusting wealth inequality that keeps white, rich men in power."

Vasquez demands a "fundamental power shift" in the government starting on racial lines, making the allegation that as "long as white folks (mostly men!) dominate this nation's wealth [and] preside over our nation's governing bodies [and] judicial systems, the racism, killing [and] injustice will continue."

Ironically, his attack against white folks seems to include the likes of Pelosi who, nonetheless, endorses him as part of her belief in political power above all else.

Pelosi, despite the Democratic Party affiliation, supports this openly un-American candidate who embraces our values no more than Vladimir Putin does, placing her priority on maintaining power rather than our country's best interests. It is most disturbing.

In October 2020, a courageous priest by the name of Father Michael O'Connor gave a sermon criticizing another Democratic Party leader, President Joe Biden, for his pro-abortion position, declaring...

..."Because Joe Biden masquerades as a Catholic, I am going to use his name. Joe Biden embraces teachings that are absolutely and fundamentally opposed to the priorities of our church – to protect life. … He is, in some respects, an embarrassment to politics. …"

Father O'Connor can now do something he should have done much earlier – which is to add Nancy Pelosi to the long list of America's political embarrassments.

On SCOTUS security, AOC is a hypocritical trauma queen

Thu, 16 Jun 2022 02:31:56 GMT

ON SCOTUS SECURITY, AOC IS A HYPOCRITICAL DRAMA QUEEN

James G. Zumwalt /June 15, 2022

World Net Daily ... The short-lived television program "Get Christie Love!" (1974-1975) was an adventure show about a black female undercover cop constantly being targeted by the bad guys, starring the late Teresa Graves.

Despite its popularity, the program lasted only one season, largely because Graves – a woman of principle driven by her faith – felt guilty about the violence it portrayed.

Forty-seven years later, we hear the tall tales of progressive liberal Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., projecting a storyline of "Get AOC!" based on her repeated victimization claims. While "Get Christie Love!" was a drama, based on a real person's life, "Get AOC!" is the fabricated creation of a drama- turned trauma-queen attempting to promote her own self-importance.

AOC often grabs news headlines despite the fact she does much more whining than legislating. When criticized for her far-left views and hypocritical acts, she has a list of victimization defenses from which to choose. Most often she simply claims her critics are racist. Born in the U.S., AOC is of Puerto Rican ancestry, describing herself as a "person of color."

Looking to expand her racism-claims qualifications, she recently declared , being surrounded by native Americans at a protest, she was "awakened" to a tribal heritage linking her to the Taino Indians. She also has claimed Jewish, European and black heritage over the years.

It was in 2018 while speaking at a synagogue she explained that Puerto Ricans are an amalgamation, making them a mixture of various races. In her case, going back many generations, "my family consisted of Sephardic Jews." This is a surprising admission for one who affirmed her hatred for Israel, allying herself with two of the most anti-Jewish members of Congress.

Unknown is whether AOC has had her DNA tested to support her ethnicity claims. If not, she is giving Sen. Elizabeth Warren , D-Mass., (aka "Pocahontas") a run for her money.

Also in her quiver of counter-attacks is "sexism" – an arrow she fires whenever it too might be helpful to take the focus off issues for which she cannot provide a substantive rebuttal.

However, it is interesting to see how she did not fail to use sexism herself when a GOP member, upon seeing a photograph of her and her boyfriend unmasked vacationing in Florida, tweeted criticism of her hypocrisy as her constituents wore masks back home.

The tweet included a reference to her boyfriend's "hideous sandals," to which AOC responded, "If Republicans are mad they can't date me, they can just say that instead of projecting their sexual frustrations onto my boyfriend's feet. Ya creepy weirdos."

Following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot on Capitol Hill – one Democrats seek to label as an insurrection, though participants were unarmed – AOC tried hard to jump onboard the bandwagon of those fearing for their lives that day. The only trouble is AOC was in an entirely different building and never saw a single rioter.

In case the riot were to spill over into her building, which it never did, Capitol Hill police had escorted her to safety.

Yet, AOC tells the tall tale that rioters were out to "Get AOC." Despite a Capitol Hill police officer escorting AOC to safety – he was the only "intruder" into her office – AOC later said, "I thought I was going to die. … When he came in, it didn't feel right because he was looking at me with a tremendous amount of anger and hostility. …"

The officer's "anger and hostility" may well have been due to AOC's defunding police efforts, sowing the seeds of distrust against law enforcement among communities "of color." Thus, if she experienced fear, it was self-inflicted.

AOC feared she would be raped that day, later causing her to claim she suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder ( PTSD ).

Despite exaggerating her Jan. 6 experience, she made a tearful announcement , claiming her fear was triggered by memories of an earlier rape. It would be interesting to know whether her PTSD claim is based on self-diagnosis and whether any police report supports her rape claim.

Nonetheless, when the January 6 investigative committee broadcast their hearings as part of a television special this month, AOC claimed seeing the riot videos again caused her to experience trauma. If true, then what she boasted about doing next shows exactly how callous and hypocritical she is.

After a young man, armed with sufficient weaponry to achieve his mission, was arrested, admitting he sought to assassinate Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Republicans proposed a bill to bolster security for the families of the Justices.

AOC said she was at home, on a "fly-out day" (the day lawmakers return to their home states for the weekend) when she learned about the bill. She boasted she rushed to Congress to cast her vote to block it until Senate Republicans helped Democrats pass gun control regulation.

Thus, AOC stupidly put SCOTUS family member lives at risk, knowing the type of gun control regulation she wants will never get the bipartisan support needed.

The Supreme Court security bill passed the House, 396-27 on June 14, the 27 votes all cast by Democrats.

If anyone suffered trauma, it is the Kavanaugh family. AOC's trauma is imagined; what the Kavanaughs experienced when a would-be assassin, triggered by the violence liberals called for from President Joe Biden on down, was arrested near their home, is real.

If, indeed, drama-queen-turned-trauma-queen AOC experienced Jan. 6 trauma, that should have sensitized her to what the Kavanaughs, and especially their two young daughters, are enduring and the need to immediately guarantee the safety of SCOTUS and their families as some liberals have already set their sites on Justice Amy Coney Barrett and her family.

In the wake of the Kavanaugh incident and the recent targeted killing of a retired Wisconsin circuit judge, security experts are fearful of increased risks of violence to members of the judiciary. The attitude of liberals like AOC suggest a willingness to see a conservative justice die before a Roe v. Wade reversal is published so a Biden liberal SCOTUS replacement can uphold it.

Recently, San Francisco voters recalled , by a wide margin, controversial DA Chesa Boudin who shares the same progressive ideology as AOC. Hopefully, voters of New York's 14th District will launch a "Get AOC" campaign to toss her out of office.

A recent poll reveals respondents with a very unfavorable AOC opinion outnumber those with a very favorable rating at almost 2-to-1; thus, it would be most rewarding for this drama queen to receive the trauma she so richly deserves by losing her reelection.

Biden's Chamberlainesque approach to Ukraine Inbox

Sat, 11 Jun 2022 01:15:38 GMT

BIDEN'S "CHAMBERLAIN-ESQUE" APPROACH TO UKRAINE

James G. Zumwalt /June 10, 2022

World Net Daily ... Assuming mentally discombobulated President Joe Biden, 79, still has the wherewithal to be able to shave on his own in the morning, one wonders, looking into the mirror, whether he sees an image of England's "Peace in Our Time" Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain gazing back at him.

Biden's most recent comments concerning Ukraine suggest he embraces a Chamberlainesque approach.

For those who suffered a liberal American education that put little emphasis on world history, Chamberlain was the British leader who, in 1939, negotiated the Munich Pact with Germany's Adolf Hitler in hopes of preventing a world war. Chamberlain returned home, telling the world he had secured "peace in our time." However, Hitler later breached the pact and World War II was underway.

Hitler was able to play a naive Chamberlain for a fool, ultimately paving the way for the Nazi leader's war machine to advance through Europe and beyond. So determined was Chamberlain to obtain peace at any price, he ceded territory to Germany not Britain's to cede – Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland .

Due to that territory's heavy German population, Hitler sought to make it part of an expansionist-oriented Third Reich. And, by sacrificing Sudetenland, Chamberlain sought to limit Hitler's dream for an even larger Third Reich, hoping the dictator would settle for a Third Reich "lite."

Today, we hear the echoes of Hitler's demand to Chamberlain to cede the Sudetenland as Russian President Vladimir Putin seeks territory in Ukraine heavily populated by Russians, and area he argues is inseparable from Russia.

With Russian-supported separatist rebels active in two Ukrainian eastern territories, Putin sought to justify his invasion by declaring Ukraine's statehood a fiction, claiming Russians and Ukrainians there are "one people."

Henry Kissinger, secretary of state under President Richard Nixon in 1973, recently suggested how Ukraine might end the war. At age 99, while Kissinger may still be a little sharper than Biden, his recommended Ukrainian peace solution suggests, if so, it is not by much.

Kissinger recommended that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky cede territory to the Russians.

This comes from a German-born Kissinger who, although only 16 at the time of the Munich Pact, should know better than anyone the consequences of ceding territory to a dictatorial madman. Any such peace will only be temporary.

If recognizing the Munich Pact's failure in bringing about a lasting peace is insufficient to query Kissinger's judgment about his Ukrainian peace solution, there are other considerations that should. Touted as a great statesman, the ultimate results of Kissinger's two best-known foreign affairs accomplishments suggest otherwise.

The first is the 1973 Paris Peace Accords , enabling the U.S. to withdraw from the Vietnam War under the guise of "peace with honor." The agreement supposedly preserved both the North's and South's territorial integrity, based on assurances to the latter we would return militarily should the former violate the agreement.

Within two years, following the North's invasion, the South fell as America stayed on the sidelines. In a controversial decision, Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 as a co-architect of the Accords that led to the South's fall.

Kissinger's second accomplishment was opening up Communist China. In 1971, while serving as Nixon's national security adviser, Kissinger made a secret trip to Beijing to negotiate a visit there the next year by the president.

That opened the door to a rapprochement between the two. However, half a century later, that rapprochement, aided by Kissinger as a consultant even after leaving the government, has transitioned China from a lower level to a much higher level threat.

With Beijing beating war drums that it will defend its right to bring Taiwan back into its fold, confrontation between China and the U.S. is more serious than ever before.

Unfortunately, however, and despite Zelensky's refusal to cede territory to Russia, Biden now seems to be taking Kissinger's suggestion to heart as he recently hinted.

While Biden had first insinuated surrender as an option as early as April, he seems to be applying more pressure on Zelensky now. Communicating clearly has never been a Biden strong suit and, unsurprisingly, his message to Zelensky was sent in that vein:

"From the beginning, I've said and I've been – not everyone's agreed with me – nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.

It's their territory. I'm not going to tell them what they should and shouldn't do. But it appears to me that at some point along the line, there's going to have to be a negotiated settlement here. And what that entails, I don't know. I don't think anybody knows at the time.

Meanwhile, unable to score what he thought would be a quick victory, Putin now seeks to create world chaos by blocking ports in Ukraine – a country known as the world's "breadbasket" for growing enough food to feed 400 million people. Biden needs to work with the world community quickly to shut this nightmare down before it has a baby formula shortage impact of global proportions.

Biden and Kissinger boast a combined 178 years of foreign policy "wisdom."

At age 44, Zelensky – originally an entertainer before becoming a political novice who ran for and won the presidency in 2019 – would be wise to ignore them, relying instead on his own political savvy on how to best deal with the Russians.

Jan. 6 hearing broadcast is akin to Al Capone vault stunt

Thu, 09 Jun 2022 00:36:40 GMT

JANUARY 6TH HEARING BROADCAST IS AKIN TO AL CAPONE VAULT STUNT

James G. Zumwalt / June 8, 2022

World Net Daily ... The publicity build-up leading to the live, two-hour television special on April 21, 1986, was immense. As a result, nearly 30 million viewers tuned in to watch "The Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults."

While television personality Geraldo Rivera, who "has a reputation as a self-promoting opportunist who'd gladly trash journalistic standards for the sake of ratings," lived up to his billing that evening, the broadcast is one that the left-leaning news purveyor would probably rather forget.

The premise for the special was based upon the fact that a renovation was planned for Chicago's Lexington Hotel, which had once served as an operations base for 1920s mob boss Al Capone. Surveyors had discovered walled-off subterranean chambers there, containing a safe. This triggered excitement of finding inside caches of money or human remains.

To add to the dramatic effect, IRS officials and forensic examiners stood by in case those discoveries were made.

Pre-taping the break through the wall into the subterranean chambers and opening the safe would remove the magic of the moment, so a live broadcast was scheduled to do so.

While the major networks were reluctant to back a publicity stunt having an unknown outcome, producers partnered with the syndicator Tribune Entertainment and the show went on.

The special was a bust, however, as nothing was found, turning the program into more of a two-hour documentary about Capone.

It is important to keep Rivera's Capone story disaster in perspective as on June 9 two major networks begin the first of six broadcasts that for all intents and purposes are nothing more than another publicity stunt – this one of a political nature.

The broadcasts will focus on the conclusions of a Democratic partisan investigative committee – assisted by two anti-Donald Trump Republican members – from its hearings held on the Jan. 6, 2021, riot on Capitol Hill.

This investigation has been dragging on for a year now with little being heard to justify the taxpayer dollars being spent to conduct it. Most telling too is the fact that the investigative committee decided to retain an experienced television producer to put on the public hearings, suggesting presentation is more important to it than is content.

It is interesting the committee felt this necessary since Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi had rejected two Republican representatives House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., recommended for committee membership, thus enabling Democrats to seat a fully one-sided group of investigators.

There is no doubt, in investigating whether Trump was responsible for the riots, an impartial committee would take an independent approach to examining the evidence to see if it led to Trump's participation. However, the starting point for this committee undoubtedly was the assumption Trump was responsible for the riots, and its job was to find evidence supporting the assumption.

Perhaps the House Democrats' partisan committee was prompted to hire an experienced producer based on a recent disclosure by its former senior technical adviser, Denver Riggleman. Just like Rivera built up suspense for his program, Riggleman has done a good job of doing the same for the Jan. 6 investigative hearing broadcasts.

Ruggleman told CNN the hearings will be "very concise" and will bring all components of the investigation together, adding, "I think people are going to be absolutely surprised how much was known with multiple groups. And I think that's what's going to be exciting to see the committee – there's some very intelligent, very talented investigators behind the doors."

However, Riggleman may have shared a bit too much information as he also stated there will be no "smoking gun" finding that Trump planned the riot.

While he said, "I think there's, there's certainly evidence of communications that led to certain types of activities that could lead to what I call 'coup-like movements,'" he failed to explain how unarmed rioters could topple the U.S. government and force Trump's installation as president. It is doubtful the choreographed broadcasts will explain this either.

Riggleman indirectly suggests why a producer was necessary as the committee toils with how to put all its data and interviews together to present a story.

"Facts are boring," he noted, "and I think the thing that we have to do is we have to be able to present those facts in a compelling way to merge that data with the amazing amount of interviews and the expertise of each of the committee's investigative teams."

He concluded, "I don't know if the (broadcast's) baseline's going to be about the criminal activity. I think it's going to be about the belief systems that we have to combat in the future."

In a separate interview, Ruggleman was asked directly if there was any "proof of conspiracy" by Trump concerning the riot. A former politician, Ruggleman artfully dodged giving a direct answer, suggesting there was a "conspiracy of thought."

Ruggleman seems to acknowledge the broadcasts are less about discovering new facts and more about fighting an ideology Democrats do not like. As the hearing broadcasts play out closer to midterm elections, it is clear Democrats seek to play the Capitol riot up for political gain rather than identifying any criminal activity by Trump.

At the end of his 1986 Capone broadcast, Rivera felt compelled to apologize for having wasted everyone's time on the broadcast.

Reviewers noted "Rivera's cheerleader tone was incongruous with the violent subject. …" Ironically, today the Jan. 6 investigative committee's "cheerleader tone" of a fantasized insurrection is incongruous with the non-violent act that actually occurred.

The broadcasts should reveal this.

After the broadcasts have aired, while we know it will not happen, it sure would be nice for the committee to apologize for having wasted everyone's time.

23 years of school shootings: Congress has been useless

Fri, 03 Jun 2022 23:31:01 GMT

23 YEARS OF SCHOOL SHOOTINGS: CONGRESS HAS BEEN USELESS

James G. Zumwalt / June 3, 2022

World Net Daily ... There is an aspect of the Robb Elementary School mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, on May 24, 2022, that is haunting and perhaps somewhat telling about the shooter.

Most shooters involved in such incidents target a school they were attending, had attended or had some other connection. Some were bullied at a school, some were the bullies themselves, and as far as the others go, we may never know what motivated them to take so many innocent lives.

However, linkage between the shooter and the school – such as in the 1999 Columbine High School shooting in Littleton, Colorado, as well as the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida – was present. But this was not the case for the Uvalde shooting.

It is eerily haunting that the shooter, Salvador Ramos, 18, while much older than his victims, sought to end the lives of so many younger, innocent children with whom, so far as we know, he had no connection.

Did he randomly select Robb Elementary School as a killing field or was there some deep, dark motivation for him doing so? Was he affected by the thought he would trigger no resistance from these young children but might from high schoolers? As Ramos was killed by police, we will probably never know.

This leaves us to speculate on his motives. Only two reasons would seem to have any logic for such illogical conduct.

First is the possibility Ramos was simply evil incarnate. He obviously sought to inflict the maximum terror upon his victims that day, telling the trembling children after locking the classroom door, "you're going to die."

It was as if he fed off of the fear he instilled in them.

Ramos was not raised in the best of families. His mother, father, grandfather and even his grandmother, with whom he was staying at the time, all had criminal records . His mother apparently raised him as a single mom. Does this suggest he targeted the younger children out of jealous rage, believing they were blessed with more loving and attentive parents?

Having shot his grandmother in the face before departing for the school definitely suggests he was incapable of connecting with family members.

Second is the possibility Ramos suffered from severe mental illness. Nothing he did from the moment he shot his grandmother, to his drive to the elementary school during which time he shot at two other subjects, to his final display at the school showing a complete lack of concern for human life, makes any sense.

Yet he also displayed moments of careful thinking – like asking his sister to buy a firearm for him when he was not yet 18. This was six months earlier. His sister refused to assist him.

Whenever there is a school shooting, many liberals rush to judgment on the solution, reissuing the call for gun control laws.

The horror of the Uvalde massacre has already prompted Canada to impose a government freeze on the sale of firearms, seeking to ban future gun ownership.

An interesting parallel to U.S. school shootings is the number of deaths linked annually to drunk drivers. It is estimated drunk driving kills 28 people every day, or more than 10,000 lives each year. However, we can well assume one option not to be pursued to stop these senseless daily massacres on our highways by irresponsible drivers is putting a freeze on car ownership.

So why then should we think banning all guns simply due to the irresponsible actions of a few will prevent such evildoers from not acquiring these weapons even if a gun sales freeze were implemented?

A recent U.S. poll reflects the fact most voters recognize anti-gun laws will not stop mass shootings. While 50% agree, 40% believe otherwise with the remaining 10% uncertain.

We have endured an era of school mass killings long enough that the public understands the solutions. They overwhelmingly support armed, adequately trained teachers. Recognizing the problem is long term, they also support hardening schools against such attacks.

Ramos, most likely, suffered from mental illness. He displayed many of the signs indicative of this – including cruelty to pets, being a loner, having a fetish for weapons (he owned at least two), etc. As comedian Joe Rogan points out, "this country has a mental health problem disguised as a gun problem."

Despite emotional and desperate calls from liberals to ban certain guns, like the irresponsible DUI drivers whose vehicle becomes a deadly weapon once they drive it, the focus needs to be preventing access to the weapon.

While a driving test will not screen out potential drunk drivers, there are written psychological tests, which with some modification, could prove very effective in screening out potential mass killers.

Take, for example, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ( MMPI ), which is almost a century old – with numerous revisions/updates made to stay current. Today, it is the most widely used and researched clinical assessment tool used by mental health professionals to help diagnose mental health disorders.

MMPI is structured so as to make deceit virtually impossible. It should be considered a requirement either for all gun purchasers or at least for students or other potential buyers who have been red-flagged.

The hypocrisy of liberals clamoring for a gun ban solution while also seeking to defund police has been obvious in the aftermath of the Uvalde shooting. They have condemned the police for not moving quickly enough to take Ramos out, yet had their defunding initiative been totally successful, there would not have been any police presence there to so act.

In fairness to the police who delayed rushing the shooter, it now appears the 911 calls from victims inside the classroom were not being relayed to the on-scene police commander who therefore believed he was dealing with a hostage crisis and awaited a negotiator.

While school shootings were infrequent until the 1990s , with the 1999 Columbine HIgh School most notably ending that decade, Congress has done squat to establish an investigative committee to determine the root causes of mass school shootings. Between 2009-2018, 288 school shootings occurred.

Twenty-three years since Columbine, children born after that tragedy are still dying as no investigative committee pursues root causes and logical solutions. Yet, a year ago this month, Congress quickly voted to establish a committee to investigate the January 6th riot.

Regrettably, Congress demonstrates it will act quickly for political gain but not to save children's lives. Sadly, as a result, the Uvalde students will not be the last robbed of their childhood..

Is Israel planning 'strike 3' against Iran over nukes?

Thu, 02 Jun 2022 02:38:14 GMT

IS ISRAEL PLANNING "STRIKE 3" AGAINST IRAN OVER NUKES?

James G. Zumwalt / June 1, 2022

World Net Daily ... Israel and Iran operate in different time zones. However, there is one clock both seek to beat and which each of them simultaneously monitors.

Israel is 2 and 0 against other nations competing to beat it, failing to achieve their goal before Israel acted to put an end to their effort. There's no doubt the mullahs are well aware of this and are working feverishly to prevent a similar outcome in their case.

During the 1970s, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein tri ed to persuade France to sell it a nuclear reactor, similar to one used by France in its weapons program. France refused; however, France did ultimately agree to help Iraq build a 40 megawatt nuclear research reactor near Baghdad.

Israel believed Iraq's intent was eventually to develop nuclear weapons and began closely monitoring the facility's progress.

In July 1980, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, Sam Lewis, after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, warned President Jimmy Carter that the Israelis might well launch a preemptive strike against the reactor.

Less than a year later, on June 7, 1981, only nine days after the Iran-Iraq war erupted , the timing was ideal for the Israelis to act, launching a surprise air assault. Ten Iraqi soldiers and a French nuclear engineer were killed in "Operation Opera," which reduced the Iranian facility to rubble.

While the Israelis claimed the strike "put the nuclear genie of Baghdad back into his bottle," the world community widely condemned the attack – including the U.S., which backed a U.N. resolution censuring Israel. However, one decade later, it was a grateful U.S. that launched its 1991 attack into Iraq during Desert Storm, relieved of any concerns about a nuclear-armed Saddam.

The Israeli attack against Iraq inaugurated the "Begin Doctrine," named after the prime minister at the time.

The doctrine recognized that Israel would not tolerate any of its enemies attaining nuclear weapons and would do whatever was required to prevent it from happening.

Twenty-six years later, in 2007, Israel would implement the Begin Doctrine again as it faced another challenge from an evolving nuclear threat. While this threat was posed by Iran, which was financing a nuclear facility being built with technological assistance from North Korea, the site itself was actually in neighboring Syria.

This was obviously being done with the cooperation of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad , an Iranian ally.

Again Israel closely monitored the facility's development and decided, in 2007, the timing was right once more to employ the Begin Doctrine. Israel offered the U.S. the opportunity to conduct the attack, but it declined.

After analyzing when to strike – both before the reactor became operational so as to avoid environmental concerns over its destruction and to provide Israel's air force the best operational conditions – the attack was undertaken on Sept. 6, 2007.

The facility was totally destroyed with virtually no international criticism this time.

Since Syria had been building the facility secretly in violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to which it was a signatory, it remained quiet about the attack to avoid any criticism. Thus, so too did Israel.

While Israel has successfully rolled out the Begin Doctrine twice now, the greatest nuclear challenge to its existence lies ahead.

From the first day Iran's own secret nuclear development program was discovered, the mullahs have claimed their intentions were peaceful, aimed at developing nuclear energy.

Rest assured, they have no interest in reducing Iran's carbon footprint; rather, they recognize that a nuclear arsenal opens the door for them to threaten nuclear blackmail to achieve their stated goal of global domination.

In fact, some Iranian leaders, brazenly believing their nuclear program will never be stopped, have already admitted their earlier peaceful claims were false.

Iran's goal of Islamic domination means destroying those countries daring to stand in its way – countries like Israel, which the mullahs have repeatedly vowed to annihilate even if it causes Iran to go up in flames. Thus, there should be no "warm and fuzzy" feeling about Tehran obtaining a nuclear arsenal.

For these reasons, Israel has been closely monitoring the development of Iran's nuclear program. It has been successful not only in raiding sites there in 2018 to steal secret information documenting the status of Iran's program but also in exposing Iranian computers to malware in 2010 that possibly set back Tehran's nuclear program several years.

Israel has done all it can, short of war, to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear armed country. But it is running low on such non-violent, preemptive options.

In a recent speech before the U.N. General Assembly, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett declared, "Iran's nuclear program is at a critical point. All red lines have been crossed." He added that the program "has hit a watershed moment, and so has our tolerance."

While appealing to the international community for help, he vowed to stop Iran from obtaining nukes no matter what the cost.

The fact that Israel has quietly negotiate d overflight rights with Arab nations that share Israel's concerns about Iran and has conducted simulated attack exercises with the U.S. against Tehran's numerous nuclear sites suggests Israel is taking Iran's threat seriously.

Almost two centuries ago, in 1823, the U.S. implemented the " Monroe Doctrine " under President James Monroe declaring that any intervention by external powers in the politics of the Americas would be viewed as a potentially hostile act against the U.S. The reality of foreign influence in the Americas today underscores the fact we have abandoned the Monroe Doctrine.

In the weeks ahead, as Iran gets closer to becoming a nuclear armed nation, Israel will be faced with the decision whether to strike Iran, or not – the latter obviously meaning it is abandoning the Begin Doctrine.

For us, abandoning the Monroe Doctrine did not present an immediate direct threat to our very existence. However, for Israel, abandoning the Begin Doctrine, does.

These two opposing forces are clearly headed on a collision course. Sometime within the very near future, one way or another, the world will witness the fallout from the impact.

In desperate need of school-shooter profiling

Sat, 28 May 2022 01:15:11 GMT

IN DESPERATE NEED OF SCHOOL-SHOOTER PROFILING

James G. Zumwalt / May 27, 2022

World Net Daily ... Yet another group of parents, relatives and friends will bury victims of a mass shooting – this one occurring at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

Salvador Ramos, the 18-year old shooter, was ultimately killed by police after shooting his grandmother at home, shooting at two people outside a funeral home en route to the school and then locking himself in a classroom where he randomly killed 19 children and two adults.

In its aftermath we hear anti-gun activists crying out for the only solution they naively believe viable in putting an end to such senseless killings.

While they again blame the gun lobby and Second Amendment, they would do well to heed the wisdom expressed years ago by a top Israeli aviation security expert who identified a problem that remains applicable to school shootings plaguing America today.

As the U.S. embarked upon improving aviation security in the wake of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, this Israel expert noticed a flaw in the system we were using. He noted, while we primarily focus on finding the weapon a terrorist might use, Israel focuses on finding the terrorist.

This expert put together a screening process involving passenger documentation and questioning that became very effective at focusing on the terrorist or terrorist-related activity. It was so effective that in a 1986 incident, it even prevented a terrorist attack involving an witless passenger being used as a "mule."

The terrorist used a new type of explosive – known as plastique – which was able to pass undetected through two X-ray machines without being detected. During the Israeli screening process, as a passenger was questioned, a red flag went up for security personnel, resulting in a further search of the passenger's carry-on luggage.

This search finally located the unique explosive device that had been placed in her bag.

As anti-gun activists still naively believe the end-all to preventing mass school shootings is to ban guns, they ignore two obvious factors – both of which speak to the wisdom of this Israeli aviation security expert.

First, just like most Americans will abide by laws reasonably seeking to control our behavior so as not to outrageously endanger innocents, there will always be those who choose not to abide by those same laws.

Second, even if such laws achieved their purpose in keeping guns out of the hands of those with violent intentions, we have already seen how violent-minded people will resort to other tools of the terrorist trade to conduct their attacks. Bombs have been used as well as knives and even vehicles. There is no shortage of tools available to those hellbent on killing innocent victims.

This is what makes it important for us to take the same approach in school security the Israelis take in aviation security: focusing on student behavior and other indicators of a potential threat to others.

What anti-gun activists have long ignored is the reality a tool, alone, is no threat absent a user's intent. It is the evil mindset of the person wielding the tool that endangers others. Walk through any home and a long list of tools can be identified capable of killing or wounding; but they pose no threat to innocent victims as no one wields them in a way to do harm.

Thus, we need to forget about focusing on finding terrorist tools, such as guns, and spend more time focusing on finding students walking the line between rationality and irrationality who are determined to pick up and use such a tool with evil intent.

Andrew Pollack, whose teenage daughter was a victim of the 2018 Parkland, Florida, school shooting, underscored this. He recently told Fox News that focusing on gun control is not a viable solution. He believes nothing has been learned from school shootings as the focus is too political and remains centered on gun laws.

Pollack went on to say that warning signs were there that people should have picked up on. "I guarantee you," he explained, "this kid (Ramos) didn't just wake up one day and say I want to kill my grandma."

Ever since the 1970s, the FBI began using a tool it developed to identify possible suspects in various types of violent crimes. Known as " profiling ," it focused on major personality and behavioral characteristics of individuals committing certain types of crimes. Half a century later, profiling's accuracy is mind-blowing.

Yet, to date, there seems to have been little concerted effort to develop a teaching program for school faculties to feed them the behavioral characteristic to be on the lookout for.

We hear that it is difficult to develop such a profile for school shooters. But there are common threads or even less common threads which, by their very nature, should raise a red flag. FBI Agent Brad Garrett tells us there is a clear profile "with some variations" that always leaves "a trail of what they're about to do."

Universal characteristics among school shooters, no matter what their socioeconomic status, include "depression, anger and rage toward others" as well as careful planning. They also have "a loss of purpose" as "they just don't know what they're on the earth for."

Nikolas Cruz, the Parkland shooter, displayed these signs and others. He had been expelled from school; he loved talking about guns, wars and terrorists; he posted photos of weapons on social media; neighbors described him as "aggressive" and "psycho" and prone to attack pets.

Former FBI Agent Steve Gomez explained such "signs can start at a fairly early age" and "tend to show that they're outcasts in society."

They appear to be loners as they "have difficulty establishing and maintaining friends and social relationships. And oftentimes you find that as a result of that they are either being bullied or are a bullier."

Gomez adds that violence against animals is a definite red flag for a potential school shooter.

The reality that school shootings will not be inhibited by gun control laws is finally starting to set in for some. Some schools are redesigning campuses to minimize casualties in the event of a mass shooting.

For example, Fruitport, Michigan, will spend $48 million to redesign its high school campus to include curved hallways – shortening a shooter's line of sight – hidden wing walls to provide more hiding places, an alarm and lockdown system to isolate a threat at the touch of a button, etc.

How many more school shootings will there have to be before our politicians focus on what really needs to be done to stop all such killers regardless of their weapon of choice?

The sitcom character Hunter Biden embodies

Sat, 21 May 2022 01:01:01 GMT

THE SITCOM CHARACTER HUNTER BIDEN EMBODIES

James G. Zumwalt / May 20, 2022

World Net Daily ... The sitcom series "Two and a Half Men" (2003-2015) starred Jon Cryer as Alan Harper – the younger brother of Charlie, played by Charlie Sheen. Divorced with a child, Alan was a notorious freeloader, living off his brother's generosity – provided begrudgingly – in a Malibu beach home and earning laughs from audiences as he did so.

It's now come to light, in a not-so-funny nonfictional relationship, Hunter Biden, 52, has become a real-life Alan Harper, living off the generosity – provided willingly – of a "sugar brother" by the name of Kevin Morris whose motivation for doing so raises questions.

It is reported that, not only has Morris paid $2 million of Hunter's delinquent taxes (double what was earlier reported Hunter owed), but he is also providing, at no cost to Hunter, a Malibu home. There, Hunter is enjoying a lavish lifestyle as he continues being investigated for possible money laundering and foreign-lobbying law violations.

This investigation continues while he also remains under federal investigation in Delaware for tax crimes.

Morris is a well-known Hollywood attorney with some high-profile clients who obviously are paying him the fees necessary for him to exhibit such largesse on Hunter's behalf. One of Morris' more notable legal achievements was brokering a $550 million licensing deal on behalf of the creators of the television show "South Park."

CBS reports Morris is serving as Hunter's "attorney and trusted adviser." In this capacity, he is also apparently helping the president's son decide how best to structure selling his artwork. How Hunter – a novice painter – has been able to burst upon the art world and sell his paintings for as much as $500,000 remains a mystery.

Accusations do circulate that this setup is simply a ruse for discretely granting individuals or foreign countries access to his father. Even an adviser to former President Barack Obama questions the ethics of such an arrangement by which the identities of the buyers of his paintings are undisclosed.

With the money Hunter and/or his company purportedly received from Russia's only female billionaire ($3.5 million), money received from Chinese elites ($31 million), his 10% holding in a Chinese company staking claim to huge lithium deposits in Afghanistan, etc., questions arise not only why Hunter failed to pay his taxes but why would Morris elect to do so on his behalf?

Recently, flying over in a private jet, Morris inexplicably appeared in Serbia where the movie "My Son Hunter" is being filmed about Hunter's corruption as well as that of the Biden family. He began interviewing people working on the film, expressing an interest in collaborating on the movie, claiming he was producing a documentary, without disclosing his close ties to Hunter.

The movie's producer, Phelim McAleer, observed that Morris was "deceptively spying for his client Hunter Biden."

Meanwhile, in yet another undeserved blessing bestowed upon Hunter by those harboring little concern over his wretched lifestyle and questionable business dealings, it is being said he may be offered a sweetheart deal by his father's Department of Justice.

It is rushing to offer him this deal before November midterm elections lead to a far less sympathetic Republican majority in Congress, which, undoubtedly, will opt to pursue its own investigation into ne'er-do-well Hunter's activities.

The New York Times reports Attorney General Merrick Garland will decide whether civil and/or criminal charges will be brought against Hunter, or if he will simply be fined. Accepting the deal would protect Hunter against subsequent legal action by a Republican congressional majority, leaving him to continue his decadent lifestyle virtually unscathed.

Based on the monetary windfall he has received for his shady influence-peddling dealings, it is indicated his fine will be a financial slap on the wrist of less than $100,000. Will Morris pay that fine off for him as well?

Legally, any monies paid by others on Hunter's behalf becomes income to him. Thus, it will be interesting to see whether he ultimately declares the $2 million payment by Morris accordingly as well as contributions financing his lifestyle.

President Joe Biden may also choose to follow a precedent set by President Bill Clinton who used his last day in office – obviously designed to limit the political fallout – to pardon tax evader Marc Rich.

Rich, like Hunter, had no qualms about helping anti-American sources for personal financial gain. Illegally selling oil to Iran during the 1973 energy crisis, Rich left the country in 1983 to avoid prosecution. Tried in absentia, he was found guilty of tax evasion – a fugitive totally undeserving of a pardon.

Nonetheless, Clinton granted him one, resulting in a substantial donation by Rich's wife to the Clinton Library. As Biden departs office, will an undeserving Hunter be given a pardon as was an undeserving Rich?

A 1957 legal case concerning moral censorship , further refined by a 1966 case defining the meaning of "obscenity," presumed the word meant that which is "utterly without redeeming social importance." The second case set the standard for proving obscenity, determining it must affirmatively establish that the material in question is "utterly without redeeming social value."

This standard accurately applies to Hunter Biden's character. His life is one that has been completely devoid of social contribution in any notable form.

He has lived the life of a spoiled, indulgent, selfish, drug- and sex-crazed abuser who, despite enormous wealth generated by zero talent other than providing access to his father's political office, still fought a failed fight to avoid even paying child support to a mother he could not remember impregnating.

The settlement he reached unsurprisingly mandated his financial records not be made public.

There have been no boundaries on Hunter's behavior in life – whether cheating on his wife, sleeping with his late brother's widow, impregnating a stripper, boastfully recording his sexual and drug exploits, his life to date is one that is "utterly without redeeming social value."

Why would anyone then sink $2 million into taking a financial tax monkey off Hunter's back and bankroll a lifestyle for him that will only keep him focused in this same aimless direction?

Sadly, the irresponsible influence of Joe Biden the father on Hunter is mirrored today by the irresponsible influence of Joe Biden the president on America.

Alan Harper would be jealous of the opulent lifestyle Morris is providing Hunter. However, even he would realize, while Hunter's depravity has no limit, one's generosity should.

With all the causes needing financial assistance that are good, we can only wonder why Morris has opted to finance the bad.

Russia could use a 21st-century Col. Penkovsky

Wed, 18 May 2022 23:50:11 GMT

RUSSIA COULD USE A 21ST-CENTURY COL. PENKOVSKY

May 18, 2022 / World Net Daily

World Net Daily ... Almost 60 years ago, the world stood on the brink of nuclear war as the Cuban Missile Crisis played out in October 1962. Discovering the Soviet Union was secretly placing intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) in Cuba, President John F. Kennedy confronted Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev on the issue.

The two leaders faced off, eyeball to eyeball, each waiting for the other to blink. JFK debated giving Khrushchev an ultimatum to remove the IRBMs. However, he could not do so without a piece of key intelligence he lacked. Khrushchev would blink first as, unknown to him, JFK was able to obtain that intelligence, enabling him to call Moscow's bluff.

Ironically, the intelligence came directly from Moscow, provided by Col. Oleg Penkovsky , a Soviet military intelligence officer. Despite knowing full well his identity would be exposed and he would pay the ultimate price, nonetheless, Penkovsky did so.

The key intelligence JFK needed was knowing whether the IRBMs were operable. If not, he could play hardball; if operable, softball would be the name of the game. Fortunately, the IRBMs were inoperable, allowing JFK to give Khrushchev an ultimatum laced with a face-saving measure. While demanding the IRBMs be removed, JFK offered to remove U.S. nuclear missiles in Turkey.

The Soviets quickly identified Penkovsky as the source of the intelligence leak. He was arrested, tried, convicted and executed in 1963.

While Penkovsky was considered a traitor by the Soviet government, his motivation was purely patriotic.

He did not spy for the West for financial gain as is the case for most Americans caught spying for our enemies. He did so because he recognized the Soviet system was brutal, stripping the Russian people of their dignity, their liberty and any sense of individuality.

Although Penkovsky had survived the rule of Josef Stalin, which had snuffed out the lives of millions of innocent Russians, he saw the Soviet leadership as totally incapable as well of improving their citizens' lives.

It would take almost four decades after Penkovsky's death for the Soviet system he so despised to finally collapse , doing so on the last day of 1991.

And while there was a wing and a prayer that the freedoms the Russian people so richly deserved would evolve, such hopes were dashed by the rise to power, as president of Russia in 2000, of former KGB officer Vladimir Putin, elected with 53% of the vote.

Several developments have given us a sufficient indication that Putin possesses a hunger for power and desire to establish a buffer around Russia, created at the expense of the same neighboring countries that once provided a buffer for the former Soviet Union.

Putin's personal power lust is demonstrated by his manipulation of Russian democracy to keep himself in office for over two decades. His hunger for the glory days of the Soviet Union has been demonstrated by numerous offensive initiatives.

Confident the West would do nothing, Putin launched a 2008 invasion of Georgia. It ended quickly, feeding his lust for future acts of aggression and leading him to believe the West had little stomach to confront Russia's military juggernaut. As a result, in 2014, setting his sights on Ukraine, Putin brought Crimea under Russian control.

That year he also made the claim that "The breakup of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century."

His appetite still unsatiated, Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24 of this year, fully expecting a cakewalk. He anticipated the action would trigger anger from the West but little else before the Russian army achieved its objective in destroying Ukrainian resistance.

Putin's big surprise was that the Russian military juggernaut revealed itself on the Ukrainian battlefield to be a paper tiger

Stiff Ukrainian resistance coupled with poor planning by senior Russian military officials left their troops susceptible to Ukrainian counter-attacks. Like the Chinese war strategy of imposing "death by a thousand cuts" upon an enemy, Ukrainians have been slicing and dicing through Russian forces.

A few weeks ago, Putin acknowledged that thousands of Russian soldiers have died in Ukraine. The loss of those personnel along with hundreds of tanks and other equipment is a major embarrassment to Putin.

Monitored communications of Russian soldiers reveal they suffer from inadequate training, poor leadership, substandard equipment and a lack of truth concerning why they are in Ukraine. Many units are refusing to fight.

Some are either abandoning operable equipment or making such equipment inoperable and then abandoning it, while others are committing suicide or killing their superiors.

There is no bigger threat to Putin's rule than thousands of Russian mothers learning their sons will not be coming home. It could well start a groundswell of opposition to a Russian leader lacking any sense of compassion not only for the thousands of Ukrainian civilians who are dying but for his own military as well.

As is typical of dictators whose aggression against others fails to go as planned, Putin has purged over a hundred FSB (successor to the old KGB) members as well as senior military advisers in an effort suggesting his failures are their fault. But all the factors now exist for a military coup as the leadership of both organizations recognize Putin poses a serious danger to Russia's survival.

We can hope one of these military/FSB leaders demonstrates the courage Penkovsky did during the Cuban Missile Crisis. His major concern was avoiding a nuclear war he knew the Soviet Union would lose, killing millions of his countrymen.

For those Russian leaders today still reluctant to do what needs to be done to turn Putin out of office, their lack of motivation may be driven by knowledge of how Penkovsky was executed. Reportedly , tied to a slab, he was slowly fed, feet first, into a crematorium fire.

While Penkovsky suffered a horrific death, he saved the lives of millions.

If only Russia's senior leadership possessed the "right stuff" to similarly act to save their country.

Are Liberals Creating A Dilemma For The Spirit World?

Sat, 14 May 2022 22:47:15 GMT

ARE LIBERALS CREATING A DILEMMA FOR THE SPIRIT WORLD?

James G. Zumwalt / May 14, 2022

AND Magazine ... British surgeon Dr. Sam Parnia, having conducted extensive research on a broad range of mental experiences related to death, affirmatively proclaims that death does not annihilate the soul.

While numerous near death experiences exist, documenting the existence of an afterlife, another part of the debate supporting the soul/body dichotomy, although much less prevalent, are cases of pre-birth experiences.

Pioneer pre-birth researcher Sarah Hintze tells us, ”Our research indicates that there is a continuity of self, that the ‘same you’ progresses through each of the three life stages – life before life, earth life and life after death.”

She then say: "In a typical pre-birth experience, a spirit not yet born into mortality crosses over from the pre-earth life or heavenly realm and appears to or communicates with someone on earth.”

If we accept the belief that a soul departs the human body upon death, then we also must accept the belief that a soul enters into it at some point after conception occurs. But, in accepting such a life equation above, we are left not knowing whether a spirit has any role in selecting a fetus of its own choice or whether it simply inhabits a fetus of a Heavenly Entity's choosing.

One would like to believe, assuming the former is true and logic prevails, spirits would select a nation of birth offering their human form the greatest earth-bound opportunities.

While America has enjoyed a long history as the land of opportunity, distinguishing itself from most other members of the world community, the U.S. might therefore be high on every spirit’s wish list to commence its material life. However, much has happened over the last several years to diminish our country’s marketing image within the spirit world.

Take, for example, America’s 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Roe vs. Wade in which it was determined a woman’s right to abort a fetus trumps the right of the fetus to survive. A spirit considering a birth nation could immediately see, based on the fact that over sixty-three million abortions have occurred in America since 1973, there is a risk of having one’s life end before it really even begins.

Another factor of concern for a spirit's selection process is the fetish here about teaching young students the transgender lifestyle.

While efforts have been made in some states to ban any discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity, critics have wrongly attacked proposed legislation doing so as a “Don’t Say Gay” bill when its genesis is simply to ban sex education of any type upon innocent minds, leaving such education to the parents.

Spirits contemplating the nation in which to ‘touch down’ would see the negative impact a liberal teaching agenda has had in one New Jersey middle school. The teacher there boasted that two-thirds of her fourth grade class suddenly ‘came out’ to her after a week of LGBT teaching , which she felt was insufficient time even to discuss the topic.

This is almost ten times the national average and strongly suggests her students who decided to come out were more motivated to please her by doing so than to make an honest revelation of their sexual orientation preference.

Spiritual concerns might also focus on the outrageous fact that while important responsibilities in life such as driving, voting, serving in the military, etc., are denied to minors for obvious reasons, the federal government, under President Joe Biden, is now allowing children to make decisions about changing their gender–decisions.

Such fateful decisions affect them for the rest of their lives – at a minority age and to receive assistance to help make the transition.

Recently, the White House took the position of encouraging reassignment surgery, puberty blockers and hormone therapy for transgender minors .

The Department of Health and Human Services released documents describing as appropriate treatments for transgender adolescents “Top surgery–to create male-typical chest shape or enhance breasts” and “Bottom surgery–surgery on genitals or reproductive organs, facial feminization or other procedures.”

Not only must there undoubtedly be concerns within the spirit world over America’s trajectory, there are clear concerns within the physical world as well. This is evidenced by the fact the vast majority of parents today (73%) are worried about their children’s spiritual well-being.

It is doubtful America remains a top nation of choice for earth-bound spirits.

However, should some still opt to do so, it is hoped, in recognizing that the outrageous policies above are pushed by liberal Democrats, they will choose to take their human form as Republicans.

Overturning Roe v. Wade: What would RBG do?

Thu, 12 May 2022 17:41:06 GMT

OVERTURNING ROE V. WADE: WHAT WOULD RBG DO?

James G. Zumwalt / May 11, 2022

World News Daily ... In April 1986, the world's worst nuclear accident occurred in Chernobyl, Ukraine, leaking radiation. Leaks of opinions not yet issued by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) are far more rare than nuclear accidents.

Yet the leak of Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health case, overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade case ruling women have a right to abortion, has triggered severe fallout by the pro-abortion community.

The Chernobyl reactor spewed radiation into the environment for 33 years before it was finally capped and sealed. Controlling fallout from the Alito leak requires immediate steps to check those liberals refusing to accept overturning bad law. The fires these liberal arsonists stoke, believing protests and violence will change the Dobbs outcome, must be extinguished.

This demands attacking lies and misinformation with truth.

President Joe Biden has been on a roll, feeding liberals at the disinformation trough. Their bellies distended with so much false information, their minds failing to comprehend the full impact of the Dobbs opinion.

While this author clearly believes abortion – except under extraordinary circumstances – is wrong, as explained before, Dobbs does not make abortions illegal. It simply seeks to overturn the flawed reasoning of 1973 SCOTUS that claimed a constitutional right to privacy limits the government's ability to interfere with one's decision to bear children.

Dobbs does not extinguish a legislature's right to pass abortion laws. Pro-abortionists simply must look to their state and local governments for the answer. Additionally, Congress could seek either to codify abortion or ban it entirely. But a legislative, not a judicial, initiative is required.

Pro-abortionist activists – undoubtedly undertaking little effort to understand Dobbs' impact – wasted no time calling for protests, which quickly turned violent. As was the liberal wont during the BLM riots of 2020-2021 to resort to violence, so too have pro-abortionists in the streets of Los Angeles, directing their anger against police as well.

As pro-abortionists set fires to pro-life facilities and sought to intimidate SOCTUS members, little is being done to hold them accountable, with Biden outrageously claiming he has no view on whether protesters should pressure them. Federal law prohibits protests that seek to influence court cases.

As was the case with the BLM riots, such violence eventually could lead to the loss of life.A tweet by extreme leftist and one-time journalist Simon Gwynn suggested just such an outrageous call for violence:

"Interesting real life trolley problem in America now. If you had the chance to kill Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, the two oldest right wing Supreme Court judges, should you do it while Biden can get his nominees to replace them confirmed?

"It's interesting as an abstract question but becomes a real conundrum if, say, you're terminally ill and have little to lose yourself, but know that it could save many women's lives in the future."

While Gwynn formerly worked for Haymarket Media Group, he reportedly resigned over "unwise" tweets. Although he later removed this tweet, he did so in a contemptuous effort to justify it:

"I've removed my recent two tweets about the U.S. Supreme Court as on reflection they're obviously pretty irresponsible, though I don't think they would be against Twitter's TOS.

FYI I don't endorse murdering anyone, but don't think there's anything wrong with thought experiments."

As has been all too apparent over the last several years in America, such outrageous "thought experiments" often become reality, pushing others, tottering on the edge of sanity, over it. Obviously, pro-abortionists such as Gwynn see no harm promoting death not only for a voiceless fetus but for humans voicing contrary views to his as well.

Not to be outdone by Gwynn's murder reference, MSNBC panelist and shock-comedian Laurie Kilmartin, in a disgusting attempt to be funny, reported she would like to have sex with the leaker of the Alito opinion so she could then abort the fetus. Satanists now claim they will press to have abortions sanctioned as a religious ritual.

Meanwhile, Squad member Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., shares her absurd legal perspective on the issue – lacking any kind of legal background – saying Dobbs is a stunning rebuke of precedent and: "These Justices are acting like this is somehow something that they have the right to do. They do not have the right to change this which is settled law." Spoiler alert: Yes, they do.

God help us when a member of Congress is clueless about the powers of our judicial branch.

Despite the fact the Alito opinion has been reviewed for months by other SCOTUS members for comment, in a 5-4 majority opinion, there should be little basis for a sudden shift. While justices can change their vote up to the time an opinion is issued, it appears no justice has been so inclined.

Any shift at this point would only undermine public confidence in the Court, leaving it susceptible to future intimidation.

It is incredible how liberals push so hard for abortion rights and killing an unborn child instead of recognizing that a safe haven alternative exists making abortion unnecessary. Emergency locations such as hospitals and fire stations serve as drop-off points on a 24/7 basis for unwanted babies.

The liberal knee-jerk reaction upon hearing about the Alito opinion leak strongly suggests pro-abortionists fail to fully understand the impact of the Court's pending decision. They would also do well to heed the sound advice of Justice Amy Coney Barrett pleading with them to read the 98-page decision before taking to the streets.

Undoubtedly, among those failing to read the opinion are former President Barack Obama and wife Michelle. They have become cheerleaders for the pro-abortion wolf pack, irresponsibly encouraging protest.

Not only as a former president but as a lawyer who was allegedly being considered by Biden to serve on the SCOTUS, Obama knows the repercussions of riling up a crowd on such an emotional issue. Yet the Obamas issued a statement claiming the termination of unborn babies is a "freedom" that was "enshrined" in the Constitution.

Such a totally irresponsible statement seeks to give legality to a terribly flawed Roe v. Wade decision. The Obamas might be surprised to learn that even the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – a true champion of the left – believed the case was wrongly decided.

She described it as a "heavy-handed judiciary's interference (that) was hard to justify. …" strongly suggesting were she alive today she would have sided with the majority opinion.

Additionally, liberal fear mongers such as twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton suggest Dobbs is just the beginning of an assault on other rights, like same-sex marriages. However, Alito's opinion specifically addresses this, stating Dobbs is limited to the abortion issue alone.

Teachers' unions have jumped on the anti-Dobbs bandwagon, ironically claiming the decision is racist.

Meanwhile, they ignore the racist implication that 38% of all 63 million abortions since 1973 involved unborn blacks, meaning 24 million fewer blacks are alive today.

If only Justice Ginsburg were alive today to join the majority. Perhaps then the whole Obama/Biden/Clinton crowd would accept the fact SCOTUS interprets the law based on the Constitution, not fanatical protests.

Liberal hypocrisy: Roe v. Wade vs. Islam's 'taqiyya'

Sat, 07 May 2022 01:18:53 GMT

LIBERAL HYPOCRISY: ROE v. WADE vs. ISLAM'S "TAQIYYA"

James G. Zumwalt / May 6, 2022

World Net Daily ... It's an interesting exercise in hypocrisy to see how liberals analyze supporting the 1973 Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Roe v. Wade decision and the Islamic concept of "taqiyya" by taking completely contradictory positions on them.

In 2015, during an interview about Islam, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson declared , "Taqiyya is a component of Shariah (law) that allows, and even encourages you to lie to achieve your goals." The liberal Washington Post criticized the statement, explaining that nothing in the Quran supports Carson's assertion.

It lectured readers that Muslims use taqiyya in a very narrow sense, only to be used when threatened with death for acknowledging they are believers but that nowhere in the Quran is lying to non-believers otherwise embraced.

Pro-Muslim scholars ridiculed Carson's statements, suggesting taqiyya is an obscure Islamic concept the vast majority of Muslims do not even understand, although "every alt-right Twitter troll is an expert on Islamic theology now." Relying upon the exact verbiage in the Quran, Islamic scholars contend that taqiyya is by no means an endorsement for Muslims to lie to non-Muslims.

Carson's supporters were basically challenged to show where in the Quran followers are encouraged to lie to non-Muslims in any other situation. Taking the position non-believers cannot claim the existence of taqiyya as Carson defined it if it is not so written in the Quran, the Washington Post issued its highest ranking for fake news – four "Pinnochios"–for Carson's statement.

Against this backdrop, we now see, due to the pending and leaked decision in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overruling the 49-year-old Roe v. Wade case that held the U.S. Constitution protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government interference, liberals take a contrary defense.

While the Dobbs decision is yet to become law, liberals have gone berserk in condemning SCOTUS for such a decision. But they fail to recognize that the Roe decision stretched the words of the Constitution to fit a square peg into a round hole. Dobbs seeks to remedy the situation by replacing bad law with good law.

The question its supporters should now put to liberals is to show where in the U.S. Constitution abortion is addressed as a fundamental right. It simply is not there.

Thus, there is no such right on a federal level, leaving each state individually to decide whether or not to ban abortions.

Liberals used just such an argument to defend taqiyya so logically (which does not seem to be important to them) they should accept the same argument in Dobbs. Just like with the liberal defense of taqiyya, one cannot claim abortion is a federal right if it is not so written in the Constitution.

What the Washington Post failed to report in its criticism of Carson, however, is that, while the Quran may not specifically state taqiyya allows one to lie in general to non-Muslims, it is a common trait of Muslim extremists to give it such an interpretation.

This was revealed by an Iranian official's recent declaration – after decades of his government claiming its nuclear program was strictly for peaceful purposes – acknowledging otherwise. Iran wants to have a nuclear weapons arsenal and admits it has lied in the past to reach that objective.

Former deputy speaker of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, Ali Motahari, stated the purpose of Iran's nuclear program has always been to build a bomb but that it was impossible to maintain secrecy on the matter.

In a haunting statement underscoring the West's naivete on the matter, Motahari boasted that a country seeking peaceful nuclear power use never starts enrichment but first establishes a reactor and then enters the enrichment phase.

Despite Motahari's declaration, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei continues to spout the lie that claims of Iranian intentions to build nuclear weapons are "absurd and senseless."

While our anti-Second Amendment president may not appreciate the firearm analogy, as Biden continues moving toward a nuclear agreement with Tehran, it suggests he has bought into the taqiyya narrative "lock, stock and barrel."

So have liberal extremists who now demonstrate – some violently – against the Dobbs decision and to harass conservative SCOTUS members for simply doing their job correctly.

Mass killer finally to be executed?

Thu, 05 May 2022 01:15:57 GMT

MASS KILLER FINALLY TO BE EXECUTED?

James G. Zumwalt / May 4, 2022

World Net Daily ... The almost half-century reign of a mass murderer appears to be ending. In 2016, although 38% of victims were black, the killer was never portrayed as racist in a world where liberals put that label on everything possible.

In fact, despite a tally of victims during this murderous reign that may well exceed those of Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong combined, it will be liberals outraged by the killer's fate.

The killer's name is Roe vs. Wade – a decision by the 1973 Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) legalizing abortion. In a leaked draft majority opinion – unprecedented in SCOTUS history – written by Justice Samuel Alito and obtained by Politico, an execution sentence may be forthcoming in the 49-year-old decision.

The case giving rise to Alito's opinion is Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, involving the constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi state law banning abortions after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. Liberals immediately criticized the SCOTUS decision.

As the opinion leak violates the ethical code of conduct required of SCOTUS interns, one wonders if it sought to rally the pro-abortion lobby before the official decision is released in a likely 6-3 or 5-4 decision.

The leak has already prompted President Joe Biden to declare he will sign legislative action to codify Roe vs. Wade into federal law. Just like the 1973 Roe vs. Wade justice supporters stretched the Constitution's words to rule a fundamental "right to privacy" existed – protecting a woman's right to have an abortion and requiring every state to legalize abortion – Biden stretches reality.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki later acknowledged such codification is unlikely since a prior effort to rally sufficient Senate votes failed.

Occasionally, an earlier era SCOTUS decision – proven later to be in error – mandated it be overturned. For example, a 1954 SCOTUS recognized the "separate but equal" doctrine birthed by the 1896 SCOTUS could not stand.

Similarly, Roe vs. Wade was bad law that "carved out a supposed right to abortion through a series of novel readings" departing significantly from the Founders' intentions.

Liberal critics attack the Dobbs decision as fascist, leading to the abridgment of other rights. This is fatuous pettifoggery, as Alito specifically dismisses these concerns, declaring it only applies "to abortion and no other right." Meanwhile, abortion survivors note anti-Dobbs supporters are "protesting our lives."

Seeking to undermine the Dobbs decision, self-declared "legal expert" Biden alleges Roe vs. Wade "says what all basic mainstream religions have historically concluded," namely that determining when human life begins in the womb is an unanswerable "question." He claims his point is supported by 13th-century Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas.

However, U.S. bishops explain Aquinas "rejected abortion as gravely wrong at every stage, calling it a sin 'against nature' to reject God's gift of life."

Additionally, hypocritical Biden forgets that in 1982, he actually proposed a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe vs. Wade, allowing states to legislate their own abortion policies – which is exactly what the Dobbs decision does. The leak has prompted Chief Justice John Roberts – who admits the Dobbs' opinion authenticity – to demand an investigation.

Publication "Catholic Votes" proffers a reason for the leak was "to try and sway one of the justices to change their vote or to whip the Democratic base into a frenzy and push for an act by Congress to protect abortion."

Keep in mind a Justice can always change his/her vote on a decision up to the day before it is released.

It concludes, "The leak is an attempt to undermine the institution of the Court, and further proof that the Left will stop at nothing to protect abortion." Roberts issued a statement indicating the leaked opinion "does not represent a decision by the Court, or the final position of any member on the issues in the case."

The draft opinion effectively indicates abortion is not a constitutional right and, accordingly, is one the states must address, noting, "The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe … arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives."

Almost half of all states stand ready to ban abortion.

At 98 pages in length, the opinion provides a detailed explanation destroying "every legal argument ever made to defend the so-called 'right to abortion,'" including...

...Roe was 'an abuse of judicial authority' and was 'on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided.'" – "[W]ielding nothing but 'raw judicial power,' the Court usurped the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves for the people."

..."In short, the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Further, abortion is not an integral part of a broader right to privacy."

Two things are certain about the leak

...(1) SCOTUS leaks have occurred in the past but never this egregiously, involving an entire draft opinion. Based on a 1919 leak incident, there is precedent for prosecuting the leaker. Nonetheless, if identified, the left will treat the leaker as a hero for giving liberals time to organize opposition.

...(2) there is little doubt which side of a 6-3/5-4 decision Justice Sonia Sotomayer's vote will fall. But as the left's SCOTUS "poster child," Sotomayer failed to take an approach similar to SCOTUS nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson during her confirmation hearings when asked to define what a woman is. Jackson refused, responding, "I'm not a biologist."

Yet Sotomayer is on record giving a statement concerning abortion that suggests she possesses such expertise. She compared a fetus to a brain-dead person, arguing that fetal movement does not prove consciousness.

Such a statement suggests consciousness, and thus life, turns upon which end of the birth canal a fetus is located. It insinuates the short journey through the birth canal is magical – a kind of assembly-line process by which a fetus snatches the "gold ring" of consciousness, becoming human just before popping out.

It is a viewpoint to which pro-abortionists subscribe to avoid embracing a fetus at any point in time as human life, allowing them then to exterminate it free of guilt. But more importantly, it is also a viewpoint lacking support from within the medical science community.

We will never know what impact decades of Roe v. Wade has had on America.

Has it denied us of minds that might have cured cancer, or developed a limitless energy source, or brought a level of sanity to an America currently lacking it? Who knows what benefits were lost by executing 63 million fetuses?

Borrowing a quote from civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., assuming the Alito opinion becomes law, fetuses can rejoicefully exclaim, at least at the federal level, "Free at last, Free at last, Thank God almighty we are free at last."

Why peace with Iran is illusory: 'It's in their constitution, Stupid!'

Thu, 28 Apr 2022 21:42:30 GMT

WHY PEACE WITH IRAN IS ILLUSORY: "IT'S IN THEIR CONSTITUTION, STUPID!"

James G. Zumwalt / April 27, 2022

World Net Daily ... As President Joe Biden sits on the cusp of reaching what he believes will be a foreign policy success for him, hoping to announce that a nuclear agreement has been reached with Iran, we need to understand why such a deal will ring hollow.

Truly understanding the mullahs' mindset tells us the Biden agreement smacks of the same illusion as the 1938 agreement between England's Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and Germany's Adolf Hitler, supposedly achieving peace in their time – a myth quickly dispelled by the outbreak of World War II.

There are a number of realities concerning Iran's nuclear program that are on a collision course set to dispel the myth of "peace in our time." But peace in our time will be the message Biden endeavors to promote by announcing a return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ( JCPOA ) – the deal negotiated by President Barack Obama in 2015 and from which President Donald Trump withdrew in 2018.

Obama lied to the American public by claiming his deal ensured Iran's nuclear program would remain "exclusively peaceful." But, just like JCPOA2015 surrendered real peace for a peace mirage, so too will JCPOA2022.

There is a good reason Iran's mullahs are excited about returning to the JCPOA2015. Despite Obama's assurances the agreement prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons, it did not. It only placed a temporary cap on Tehran's nuclear activities, allowing it the opportunity to develop a nuclear weapons capability later.

Nor will JCPOA2022 mend flaws left unaddressed by JCPOA22015 such as failing to ban Iran's missile program or to stop its funding of terrorism.

And, just as JCPOA2015 did in releasing the economic stranglehold on Iran placed by President George Bush, JCPOA2022 will lift the devastating sanctions Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign imposed on Tehran.

Biden's deal will also lend credibility to Iran's current president, Ebrahim Raisi, who, along with the late Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini, orchestrated the massacre of thousands of political opponents in Iran in 1988.

U.S. Senate approval was required for JCPOA2015, which, it was later learned, contained several side deals secretly negotiated and about which the Senate had no prior knowledge. Some were absolutely ridiculous, allowing Iran to self-inspect certain locations suspected of nuclear-related activity while exempting others from some limitations.

In both JCPOA2015 and JCPOA2022, the principle made famous by President Ronald Reagan in 1987 in negotiating deals with the Soviet Union, "Trust but verify," was abandoned. And, while Obama submitted JCPOA2015 for Senate approval, Biden has not yet agreed to submit JCPOA2022 to the Senate, despite such a mandate for treaties.

Meanwhile, the converging realities about Tehran's nuclear program and intentions making a peaceful Iran under the control of the mullahs impossible. Consider...

...(1) More so than any other nation, Israel closely monitors Iran's advancements as it endeavors to achieve a nuclear weapons capability. Israel has already demonstrated a phenomenal ability to gather intelligence on such matters through every means possible, direct or indirect.

It closely monitors Tehran's " breakout " capability – a term referring to the estimated time it will take for Iran to produce sufficient weapons-grade enriched uranium fuel to create a single nuclear weapon. Israel's intelligence helps it establish a "red line" that will then drive its actions to negate a nuclear threat.

It has a track record for doing so, evidenced against Iraq in 1981 and against Syria – the latter acting on Iran's behalf to build a nuclear facility – in 2007.

...(2) Despite the mullahs' assertion their nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes – a position taken in accordance with the deceptive Islamic practice of " taqiyya, " empowering Muslims to lie to non-Muslims concerning their real objectives – there should be no doubt what Iran's true intentions are.

While Iran has undertaken numerous efforts to conceal the truth, such as claiming a blast at a nuclear silo was an earthquake , grading soil around facilities to avoid detection, etc., development of nukes is part of its master plan to achieve Islam's global domination.

...(3) International agreements are simply used by Iran to achieve later what it cannot achieve sooner.

Despite signing the 1968 Nonproliferation Agreement in 1970 by which Tehran promised not to "manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons" and which it honored until the mullahs came to power in 1979, its efforts to pursue this goal will be pursued even should the end result destroy Iran.

This message was declared by Supreme Leader Khomeini, dismissing concerns about destructive retaliatory consequences against Iran for its first use of nuclear weapons: "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let Iran go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."

...(4) The West foolishly applies the "reasonable man" test to Iran, rationalizing that peace is always preferable to war. This ignores Iran's driving religious ambition that Islam should rule the world.

This is not a new vision; it has been the goal of Muslims for 1,400 years. And Iran's determination to see if fulfilled has been made abundantly clear with nine words from an English translation of the preamble of its own constitution .

These words tell us that Iran's Army and Revolutionary Guard not only have a domestic mission – protecting the country's borders – but also an extraterritorial one, "fulfilling the ideological mission of jihad in God's way; that is, extending the sovereignty of God's law throughout the world [ emphasis added ]."

...(5) Finally, going back to Israel's concerns about a nuclear-armed Iran, a leading cleric recently reminded his people "one of the main goals of the Islamic revolution has always been the annihilation of the Zionist regime," which is an absolute "precondition" for Islam's global domination to follow.

American contract law mandates for an agreement to exist, there must be a "meeting of the minds" between parties. Such a mandate will never exist with Iran's mullahs whose sinister intentions lie in subjecting the world to Islamic rule, achieving it by any means possible including nuclear war. Agreements are therefore meaningless.

One need only look to the fact not one single international agreement exists to which the mullahs have adhered .

As Forrest Gump, hoping to dispell the West's naive and illusionary belief that peace with Iran is at all possible, would tell us in his simplistic way about the sinister intent of their ideology, "It's in their constitution, Stupid."

Is Ukraine invasion a morale buster for the Russian army?

Fri, 22 Apr 2022 15:50:23 GMT

IS UKRAINE INVASION A MORALE BUSTER FOR THE RUSSIAN ARMY?

James G. Zumwalt / April 20, 2022

World Net Daily ... In warfare, especially when one is the aggressor, quickly securing enemy territory is crucial to the invader's success. The more territory it quickly occupies, the more damage it inflicts upon the defender's morale.

Consequently, prior to launching an invasion, the aggressor carefully determines the best route of attack – one allowing defensive forces to be avoided as much as possible while penetrating inland as far as possible.

It was for this reason Russia opted to take one invasion route into Ukraine where its defensive forces were lacking.

Under cover of conducting a military exercise in Belarus – a Russian ally directly north of Ukraine – President Vladimir Putin's forces lingered there afterward. Then, on Feb. 24, Belarus became a launching pad for a Russian invasion route into Ukraine, providing it with the shortest route of advance toward the country's capital of Kyiv.

However, the Russians were unable to reach Kyiv, ironically being turned back by an "invisible force" they themselves had created 36 years earlier when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union. The Russians encountered this force at a place called Chernobyl, which, in 1986, was the site of what is considered to be the world's worst nuclear reactor disaster.

The cause of the disaster was the flawed design of the Soviet reactor and mistakes made by poorly trained operators. Obviously due to the absence of Ukrainian defense forces there, Chernobyl easily fell into Russian hands within the first day of the invasion.

However, as Russian troops advanced through and bivouacked in Chernobyl, they dug trenches and otherwise disturbed the soil. The trenches were dug in what is called the Red Forest, taking that name after thousands of trees turned red immediately after the nuclear disaster.

It is considered "the most polluted in the entire (exclusion) zone." By choosing this as one of its invasion routes, the Russians reportedly stirred up a deadly dust, not only endangering them but neighboring countries as well.

The invisible force that ultimately has driven the Russian forces out is radioactive dust. Chernobyl and the surrounding area have virtually been uninhabitable, which was why no Ukrainian defense forces were occupying the territory.

So great is the radiation risk that Ukraine does not even allow trained workers, wearing protective gear, into the forest.

While Russia was well aware of this, nonetheless it chose to expose its own forces to the radiation risk simply to take advantage of the easier access route to Kyiv.

Consequently, hundreds of Russian troops are now being treated in hospitals in Belarus suffering from acute radiation sickness. There has been at least one reported death from the radiation exposure, and there will undoubtedly be more.

Meanwhile, those not yet sickened have beaten a hasty withdrawal . Without having to fire a shot, Ukrainians were able to affect a Russian withdrawal from Chernobyl.

But an invasion route through Chernobyl was not the only example by which the Russian military leadership demonstrated little concern for their troops.

Numerous cases of frostbite have occurred as no effort was made to equip troops with cold weather gear. And the Russian advance also has been frustrated by the little consideration given to replenishing fuel and food, leaving empty gas tanks and empty stomachs.

Poor training has resulted in numerous ambushes by Ukrainians in which Russian troops fail to take minimal responsive action to minimize their casualties. Additionally, in an ultimate slap at its own troops, immediate medical care for the wounded has been lacking . It is no wonder Ukraine reports that over 17,000 Russian soldiers have so far died.

The Russian army has undoubtedly learned a lot about itself during its invasion into Ukraine. While it has learned an invader's superior firepower does not necessarily trump a defender's determination to protect the homeland, it has also learned its own government shows little concern over the risks – some of which are totally avoidable – to which it is exposed.

A combination of both these realizations can effectively break the morale of even the greatest of armies.

While the Ukraine war has dispelled the long-held myth of a great Russian army, such realizations most assuredly are undermining whatever fight this paper tiger of a military force has left.

Who's afraid of the big, bad Iranian wolf?

Thu, 14 Apr 2022 17:15:03 GMT

WHO'S AFRAID OF THE BIG, BAD IRANIAN WOLF?

James G. Zumwalt / April 13, 2022

World Net Daily ... While multiple claims exist for the origin of the children's fairytale "Little Red Riding Hood," all tell the same story of a little girl played for a fool by a devious wolf disguising itself as Hood's grandmother, simply by wearing her nightgown, and whom it had just eaten.

But as children grow older and wiser, they cannot help but realize, in accepting the wolf's disguise, Little Red Riding Hood must not have been the brightest bulb.

As President Joe Biden and his negotiators rush to seal a nuclear deal with Iran's mullahs, it is abundantly clear they have been played for fools by a devious Iranian wolf, similarly donning a ludicrous disguise to do so. As a result, we must believe the lights are not all on for Biden and his negotiating team.

Apparently, Biden's soft-pedaling of the U.S. position on the agreement has caused at least three of his team members to resign as they refuse, in good conscience, to support such a one-sided deal in Iran's favor.

Such one-sidedness is fervently opposed by Israel and its Arab allies as they know it will only embolden a Tehran committed to the former's destruction. Our Arab allies are frustrated Biden holds Saudi Arabia responsible for human rights violations while ignoring the more extensive violations by Iran.

Secretary of State Tony Blinken deceivingly claims about the nuclear deal and our allies, "When it comes to the most important element, we see eye-to-eye. We are both committed, both determined that Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon."

However, just like the previous nuclear deal failed to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear arsenal, so too does this one – a fact that has even triggered 18 House Democrats to sound the alarm!

Biden, in desperate need of a foreign policy victory, foolishly believes returning to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ( JCPOA ) – negotiated by President Barack Obama in 2015 and from which the U.S. withdrew under President Donald Trump in 2018 – is the way to achieve it.

But, even ignoring the numerous faults plaguing JCPOA that enables Tehran to eventually obtain a nuclear arsenal, Biden appears to be doing Obama a step better by granting the mullahs an even more advantageous deal than the 2015 agreement did.

This involves, among many other judgmental errors by our negotiators, removing a terrorist group, birthed early on by the mullahs after coming to power in 1979, from its "wolf" status – a status awarded by the U.S. State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) in 2019.

By way of background, U.S. law requires that the State Department annually publish "Country Reports on Terrorism." As the name suggests, the report identifies the governments of countries which directly or indirectly contribute to terrorism around the world. Ever since 1984, Iran has repeatedly been recognized as the leading "state sponsor of acts of international terrorism."

Seeking to disguise its direct involvement in terrorist activity, Iran passes responsibility for this mission on to two groups it controls – one foreign based, the other domestic.

The former is Hezbollah – Lebanese Shias whose ties with Tehran encouraged it to start spreading the Islamic Revolution throughout their country and is funded to the tune of almost $100 million annually by Iran to do whatever Tehran mandates.

The latter is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ( IRGC ), immediately established by decree in 1979 as a military force by the mullahs after they came to power – a force independent of Iran's regular army as they feared it lacked the proper Islamist mindset – with the mission of safeguarding the new republic.

Its "safeguarding" mission includes the conduct of terrorist operations outside Iran's border.

Although IRGC's terrorist intentions were well-known by the U.S. for years, it was not until 2019 that the Trump administration labeled it as an FTO for a wide range of "malign activities."

It should have received this designation long ago as its terrorist activity has been linked to the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Lebanon – causing a single day's largest loss of American warriors since the Vietnam War – and the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers complex in Saudi Arabia.

IRGC's FTO status became the first time an official military organization of a foreign state was ever so designated.

Apparently, the designation has somewhat inhibited IRGC's ability to continue its terrorism mandate as the mullahs now demand of Biden, as part of the nuclear agreement, he remove its FTO designation.

Shockingly, Biden is seriously considering doing so in order to get Iran to approve the nuclear agreement. Unbelievably, the deal contains a loophole that will "allow Iranian nationals linked to terrorism to enter and stay in the United States."

Unsurprisingly, Biden fails to consider that removing IRGC's FTO status represents a slap in the face to all those who have lost their lives due to its murderous activities.

And he outrageously considers doing so at the same time we have discovered Iran is planning terrorist attacks to take out U.S. officials who were involved in the 2020 killing of the IRGC's commander at the time, Gen. Qasem Soleimani, for his terrorist activities.

While Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called for Western leaders to show more courage in helping his country stop Russia's aggression, maintaining IRGC's FTO status requires minimal courage on Biden's part. That is, unless Biden feels securing a deal with Iran outweighs any threat by Iran.

In "Little Red Riding Hood," a woodsman heard the girl's cries for help, saving her, and, in order to give the youngsters' fairytale a happy – albeit somewhat unpleasant – ending, he forced the wolf to regurgitate grandma. However, should Biden remove IRGC's FTO designation, there will be no happy ending.

Granted, with or without the designation, the organization will continue its work on behalf of the mullahs, earning Iran top billing again as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism; however, leaving it with the FTO status at least demonstrates minimal courage by Biden in calling a terrorist organization what it truly is.

So, who's afraid of the big bad Iranian wolf? If he removes IRGC's FTO designation, clearly Biden is.

How do we know Jackson will be our 1st black woman justice?

Sat, 09 Apr 2022 13:14:47 GMT

HOW DO WE KNOW JACKSON WILL BE OUR FIRST BLACK WOMAN JUSTICE?

James G. Zumwalt / April 8, 2022

World Net Daily ... On April 7, the U.S. Senate confirmed Judge Kentanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) when he retires this summer. In doing so, President Joe Biden has allegedly kept at least one of the campaign pledges he made to Americans in promising to nominate the first black woman to serve on SCOTUS.

The word "allegedly" applies above due to a major problem of Jackson's own creation. While we do know Jackson is black, as Biden promised, how do we know she is a woman based on her earlier testimony?

One of the most noteworthy moments of Jackson's confirmation hearings was her response to the query by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., "Can you provide a definition for the word woman?"

For those having heard the Helen Reddy song of long ago, "I am Woman," there is little doubt Reddy knew the answer. And, there is little doubt the vast majority of Americans also knew the answer.

It should come as no surprise, therefore, that Jackson – who will prove perhaps to be the most liberal-minded member to sit on the highest judicial bench in the land – responded, "I can't," adding, "I am not a biologist."

It was an interesting answer since Supreme Court justices recognize they are not supposed to inject politics into their decision making. However, it is clear from Jackson's response to Blackburn's question, rather than choosing to provide a simple definition, she opted to inject gender politics into the hearings.

It caused Blackburn to comment: "The fact that you cannot give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about."

From the beginning of time, determining what a woman is has not been a complex science. Adam, of Adam and Eve fame, obviously would have had no issue defining what a woman is. It was a necessary step in the evolution of homo sapiens.

Yet early into the 21st century, gender politics has sufficiently fuzzed up the issue to the point where providing a definition of what a woman is – at least for the liberal-minded – has become as complicated as trying to place a square peg into a round hole.

After Jackson's failure to define what a woman is, Fox News Digital contacted various federal agencies hoping they could clarify the issue since their websites reference woman-related topics such as "women's health."

Apparently, guidance was quickly circulated that these federal agencies were to apply a similar level of naivete about the word as Biden's Department of Justice, Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Bureau of Prisons all proved unable to define what a woman is.

This was despite website boasts by certain federal agencies that some initiatives they were undertaking sought to assist women.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH), which discusses "women's rights" and describes itself as "the steward of medical and behavioral research for the Nation," referred Fox to its website section on "sex and gender."

That section details that "'Sex' refers to biological differences between females and males, including chromosomes, sex organs, and endogenous hormonal profiles," while "'Gender' refers to socially constructed and enacted roles and behaviors which occur in a historical and cultural context and vary across societies and over time."

It goes on to say, "All individuals act in many ways that fulfill the gender expectations of their society. With continuous interaction between sex and gender, health is determined by both biology and the expression of gender." Clear on that?

While the words "woman" or "women" often appear in NIH's literature, none of it provides a description of their meaning regarding sex and gender. When queried for a response, NIH ended the conversation, claiming it had nothing further to add.

Apparently, Fox did not check with the Oval Office for a definition of woman. Perhaps Biden would have explained the somewhat unique "sniff" test he has developed to help him identify women and, therefore, could better describe them.

Rep. Madison Cawthorne, R-N.C., stood up before the House and chastised liberals for their radical brainwashing of kids with their ridiculous failure to define what a woman as the alleged party of science chose instead to launch a "war against biology."

In claiming gender is something with which you identify rather than with which you are born, liberals seek to complicate that which is simply determined by nature at birth.

Obviously, Jackson has a purpose in taking the position she cannot define what a woman is.

A half century ago, Title IX of the Higher Education Act took effect, expressly banning sex-based discrimination in any school or other education program receiving federal funding. As there were all-male sports existing, it sought to establish separate but equal sporting opportunities for female athletes.

Title IX successfully did this until transgenderism entered the arena, negatively impacting on women's sports by allowing biological males, in touch with their feminine side, to compete against biological females, despite the former's physical advantages.

This will undoubtedly bring a test case to SCOTUS in the not too distant future in which biological women argue Title IX's intent is being violated. One can rest assured Jackson's decision will support transgenders in such a case.

Also, Jackson's track record for judicial decisions is not very inspiring. Multiple decisions have been overturned by fellow liberals on higher courts for reasons of judicial overreach. Hopefully, her SCOTUS colleagues will call her out should she continue this trend.

In 1964, Justice Potter Stewart, trying to explain the Court's ruling that "obscene" speech is "unprotected," could not offer a definition of what "hard-core" pornography – i.e., obscenity – is. He added, "but I know it when I see it."

While one can fully understand Stewart's inability to provide a definition of obscenity, 21st century liberals cannot even make a similar claim they will know a woman when they see her, claiming we need to await a subject's pronouncement of same.

Perhaps, then, Jackson needs to affirm for us that she is, in fact, a woman so we know the title of the first black female SCOTUS member is appropriate.

A brutal Putin is ignoring history

Thu, 07 Apr 2022 00:41:07 GMT

A BRUTAL PUTIN IS IGNORING HISTORY

James G. Zumwalt / April 6, 2022

World Net Daily ... If only our young people learned more about history and less about wokeism, perhaps they would understand history does repeat itself.

For example, history tells us how conflicts almost eight decades apart set the stage for what is occurring in Ukraine today.

In 1936, facist-based rebels of future dictator Gen. Francisco Franco began a three-year conflict to end Spanish democracy. He succeeded , aided by Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany, which used the conflict to test its weaponry and tactics. Doing so successfully in Spain, a confident Hitler launched – along with some help from Japan – the world into a global war.

In late October 2015, Russia entered a four-year civil war in Syria, in which rebel forces had been seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad. The rebels, supported by Gulf Arab and Western states, were close to defeating Assad when President Vladimir Putin came to his aid. Russian air power began hitting what he claimed were terrorist targets but which, in reality, were rebel targets.

While the civil war in Syria still rages on, Russia still maintains military forces there.

But, just like Hitler had done in Spain, Putin saw Syria as an opportunity to test Russian equipment and tactics for use in a future conflict. It gave him a certain comfort level for a later invasion of Ukraine.

Syria proved to be a learning experience for the Russians. There was a tactic the Syrian army employed against the rebels that we have very recently seen Russia adopt in Ukraine.

For most of the Syrian civil war, government forces have distinguished themselves by becoming one of the world's worst offenders in torturing and executing children. A United Nations (U.N.) report indicated that children as young as 8 have been used as human shields during Syrian army raids against rebels.

As Russian tank forces have fallen prey to Ukrainian anti-tank weapons, weaponry they had never encountered in Syria, they have now adopted the Syrian army's tactic of kidnapping children to use as human shields. According to witness reports, the Russians have been placing them in front of their tanks, daring defenders to take the tanks under fire.

While it is inconceivable to think in modern times any nation's ideology would accept the use of children as human shields, another current Russian ally demonstrated it had no compunction about doing so.

During the eight-year Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), Iranian soldiers suffered a high casualty rate attempting to advance through minefields protecting various Iraqi positions. So Iran hit upon the idea of utilizing its own children to march through the minefields, eventually clearing the way for an Iranian assault.

The children, between 12-17 years old, wore red headbands emblazoned with the words "Warriors of God" in Farsi.

The children knew what they were being recruited to do and were given a small metal key to wear around their neck, which, they were told, was their "ticket" to paradise "if" they died performing their mission. Apparently, so many of them did die that the mullahs subsequently ordered less expensive plastic keys for children to wear.

The U.N. is being kept busy with numerous reports of Russian soldiers committing war crimes in Ukraine. Mass graves – many containing civilians with their hands tied behind their backs – have been discovered in areas after the Russians have withdrawn.

Their savagery is evident by cases in which they were not content just to execute civilians but to torture them beforehand as well. When the mayor of one Ukrainian town refused to cooperate with the Russian occupiers, she had her fingers broken and saw her husband and son executed before she too was shot.

Just as we get numerous reports of Russian war crimes in Ukraine, we also are getting reports that murderous acts by Russian mercenaries, conducting an anti-terrorist operation with government troops in Mali, generated hundreds of casualties. Mali has been fighting Islamists there for a decade.

However, witnesses tell the story that combined Russian/Mali units have been forcing prisoners to walk in front of them in small groups, executing them from behind.

Russian atrocities are not something new to old-school Soviets. In 1985, four Russian diplomats were abducted in Beirut by Muslim extremists. They demanded that Moscow pressure the Syrian government to stop pro-Syrian militia forces from shelling rival Muslim positions in Tripoli.

In response, Soviet secret police kidnapped a relative of the radical Lebanese Shia Muslim leader involved in the abduction, castrating him, shooting him in the head and then sending the leader his relative's severed organs. The Soviet diplomats were quickly released.

Also evidencing the brutality of Putin's "take no prisoners" mindset is an infamous video that circulated over the internet years ago. In 2011, Russian commandos took back control of one of their merchant ships after Somali pirates had captured it.

The pirates were put back in their own boat and cuffed to it so they could not escape. After placing explosives in the boat and setting it adrift, the Russian commandos then detonated the explosives, immediately killing all onboard the pirate ship.

Putin should avail himself of two historical events as well.

In 1939, as the world focused on Hitler's aggression, the Soviet Union's Josef Stalin felt the timing was right to bring Finland back into the Soviet fold. Like Putin's effort in Ukraine, Stalin launched an unprovoked invasion of Finland, expecting a quick victory.

The Finns, like the Ukrainians, courageously countered the Russian invasion, forcing Stalin to recognize victory was not to be his and signing a peace treaty after three-plus months. Putin may have to come to the same realization with Ukraine.

Putin is ignoring a post-World War II history that should have imparted to all world leaders a very important lesson in accountability for war crimes their forces commit.

Perhaps a virtual visit to the Nuremberg Museum, memorializing the accountability of Nazi Germany's war crime ringleaders at the Nuremberg Trials , would be timely for him and his generals.

Dictators play 'Who Wants to be a Multi-Billionaire?'

Sat, 02 Apr 2022 22:53:31 GMT

DICTATORS PLAY "WHO WANTS TO BE A MULTI-BILLIONAIRE?"

James G. Zumwalt / April 1, 2022

World Net Daily ... As if a dictator's actions or the corrupted voting system by which political office is taken is insufficient evidence of a totalitarian government, another indicator is to count the number of zeros in the leader's bank account. This might prove somewhat difficult as most dictators hide their accounts or use shell corporations or other devious means to conceal assets.

For Russian President Vladimir Putin, there are many zeros alongside bank accounts in his name. He is believed to be one of the world's richest men, with assets squirreled away, totalling between $20-$40 billion. Depending upon which number is right, that is almost $500 million to $1 billion dollars for each year since coming to power in 2000.

Great wealth has always been an intoxicating draw for dictators. Putin has collected far, far more than his share to now become one of the "rich and infamous."

Among the manifestations of his opulence is a 459-foot $700 million luxury megayacht, which, unfortunately for him, was recently seized by officials in Italy. Equipped with ballrooms, gyms, pools, hospital rooms, etc., the boat gives Putin the ability to enjoy luxury as his people survive on US$8,000 annually.

But now the inner circle of Putin's oligarchs are feeling his pain.

Many of their assets are also being seized wherever found outside of Russia. There was even an attempt to scuttle one oligarch's yacht by a Ukrainian mechanic, whose effort was thwarted by other crew members.

Yachts seem to be a favorite of dictators. Perhaps one of the most interesting vessels was the one owned by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein before he was ultimately held accountable by the hangman for his decades of brutality.

Worried his inner circle might turn on him, Saddam did not share with them he had a secret "James Bond-esque" escape route built into his yacht – one only discovered after it was bombed in 2003 and later boarded by U.S. forces.

In addition to a helicopter landing pad and rocket launchers, Saddam's gold-encrusted super yacht was equipped with a most unique escape system. It consisted of a hatch at the very bottom of the vessel to which was attached, obviously hidden from view underwater, a mini-submarine into which Saddam planned to quietly slip away if in danger, leaving intruders totally baffled as to where he was.

After Saddam went into hiding to escape U.S. troops searching for him during the war, perhaps he remained hopeful, not knowing the yacht was no longer operable, about eventually making his way for a clandestine escape.

Any such hopes were dashed when he was finally discovered hiding in an eight-foot deep spider hole.

Video of Saddam's capture was somewhat shocking to world viewers. Normally obsessed with hygiene, he was found unkempt, bearded and with matted hair. It was quite a contrast to the perfectly coiffed and confident leader during his ruling days regularly seen among posh surroundings.

Another dictator who extravagantly enjoyed the fruits of his people's labors was Romanian President Nicholai Ceausescu. His iron-fisted rule of the country lasted from 1965 until he was deposed by a revolution in 1989.

Originally believed by Western elites he would open the door to democratic change, Ceausescu's visit to North Korea in 1971 inspired him to adopt Pyongyang's system in Romania. It led him to become the most despised leader in the country's history.

As an example of his selfish extravagance, Ceausescu had several homes. And, while citizens owning just one home suffered energy blackouts during cold weather months, Ceausescu's homes never did. Caretakers, not knowing when he might show up and fearing his wrath should the heating not be to his liking, constantly kept them warm.

During the revolution, Ceausescu and his wife were arrested, quickly tried and summarily executed by firing squad.

As he stood in front of his executioners, perhaps believing his vast wealth was his right of passage, he began singing the communist hymn declaring, "Long live the Socialist Republic of Romania! History will revenge me!"

Today, several of his former homes are used as public offices.

Listing a "Dishonor Roll of Wealthy Dictators" would be incomplete without mentioning Iran's mullahs. Before the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought them to power, the mode of transportation for many of them was by donkey as they strove to stay above the poverty line. Today, it is a much different story, especially for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

In 2019, the U.S. State Department estimated Khamenei's accumulated wealth at around $200 billion, noting that financial corruption was "rife in all parts of the Iranian regime starting at the top."

This is quite an increase from a 2013 estimate computed by Reuters, which put his wealth at only $95 billion. As far as what is in his "wallet," Khamenei also has the right to grant tax exemptions, which he regularly does for many of the entities he owns.

Such bounty is not bad for a holy man of an impoverished nation where 80% of the people suffer from poverty and only 4% hold all the wealth. There was no mention of such Iranian corruption during President Barack Obama's tenure as he feared mentioning the same would upset the mullahs during nuclear-agreement negotiations.

One need not have to necessarily be a dictator to obtain such wealth. Hunter Biden's influence peddling has enabled him to establish a net worth of $230 million while earning a 2021 annual income of $18 million.

As Putin's $700 million yacht will now be deducted from his net worth, he still will have no need to "tighten the belt buckle" as he has stashed away more than enough cash to keep him living the kind of lifestyle he feels he richly deserves.

While it is unlikely we will ever see it happen, if war reparations eventually are assessed against Moscow for its senseless destruction of Ukraine, in a just world, it would be poetic justice to see Putin forced to personally contribute his wealth as well to foot the bill.

Sadly, not even the full $40 billion Putin may have will sufficiently compensate Ukrainians to the full extent of damage and loss of life they have suffered.

But bursting Putin's financial bubble would at least be a good start in holding him accountable for all he has wrought.

The echo of 'Zinky Boys' and Russia's recalcitrant army

Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:41:45 GMT

THE ECHO OF "ZINKY BOYS" AND RUSSIA'S RECALCITRANT ARMY

James G. Zumwalt / March 30, 2022

World Net Daily ... A term rarely heard in the West, if at all, is "Zinky Boys."

It originated in the former Soviet Union during that country's involvement in the Afghanistan fiasco (1979-1989) – a war that so drained Russia of what limited treasure it held and the blood of a generation transitioning between baby boomer and Generation X, it would contribute to the USSR's collapse.

Early in the Afghan conflict, Soviets shipped their dead soldiers back in sealed zinc coffins, giving rise to the term Zinky Boys – doing so while claiming there was no ongoing conflict. While battlefield warriors hope to be buried on home soil, not all were.

The Soviet leadership determined it was less likely to stir up war animosity at home if their dead were either left behind or shipped off to Warsaw Pact countries for disposal – as was done with their wounded.

Telling about the brutality of Soviet rule was the revelation that some of its wounded, who had gone missing on the battlefield, years later were discovered living among the Afghan population, choosing never to return home. This was understandable in light of leaders who felt no sense of obligation to dead warriors and their families. Thus, many fallen never qualified as Zinky Boys.

Due to its iron-fisted rule, the Soviet Union never experienced antiwar protests that plagued the U.S. during the Vietnam War. While the former bred a submissive population and military, it would undergo a change giving the Zinky Boys a voice in the Ukraine war.

In the late 1980s, under General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union implemented two policy changes easing its 1990s transition from the USSR to Russia.

The policies were " glasnost ," meaning openness, and " perestroika ," meaning a shift away from a centralized economy and more toward one enhancing automation and labor efficiency.

Although Russian society today remains more open than it ever was under Soviet control, the glasnost of President Vladimir Putin, who came to power in 2000, reigned in the glasnost Gorbachev implemented. Both Gorbachev and Putin, based on their powers of office, essentially were/are dictators, but while Gorbachev served benevolently to improve life for his people, Putin couldn't care less.

Under Gorbachev, glasnost, like the coronavirus, spread throughout the land, enticing the Soviet population of old out of its submissive shell. Having tasted the nectar of freedom under a collapsing Soviet system, it is unwilling to go back to those days.

And, nowhere is this free spirit rearing a more defiant head toward Russian leaders than among those placed in harm's way – the military – senselessly sent in to initiate an unprovoked invasion of neighboring Ukraine. This was done with little attention focused on effective training, any sense of mission purpose or troop welfare.

Accordingly, we are witnessing incidents occurring today by the Russian military unheard of among the Soviet military of old.

The Soviet army took an obedient attitude toward its military leadership, understanding what it had on the battlefield was the best it would get. Complaining was fruitless and untolerated.

However, today's Russian army is not the submissive army of its fathers. Intercepted communications among Russian units reveal a lot of complaining as soldiers recognize they lack the best training and equipment needed.

The Ukraine war has been a wake-up call for commanders who are finding their equipment in dire shape. One tank regimental commander – so distraught upon learning only 10% were operational due to theft of parts – committed suicide.

Communication has been a serious problem – not only from the standpoint of secure communications but from that of effectively executing command and control.

This has forced senior commanders to go to the front lines – a measure thta has resulted in their being specifically targeted in many cases. So far, at least seven Russian generals have been killed by snipers or other means

This is already two more flag officers than the Soviets lost in the entire Afghanistan war.

The frustration on the part of Russian troops is clearly revealed by radio intercepts made during an attack on the small Ukrainian city of Makariv. Despite the presence of civilians, the Russian commander ordered hits against the entire town.

When the Ukrainians fought back fiercely, the commander then pleaded for more support, reporting his men were "suffering" badly and demanding to know where the "f__k" his promised air support was. This was followed by him yelling, "You f___ing forgot" about it!

In any event, air support has not been precise as Russian troops have been bombed on several occasions by their own air force.

Another intercept, obviously involving a veteran of an earlier conflict, had him screaming, "Even in Chechnya, there was nothing like this. This is a madhouse!"

While a toxic environment exists between Russian troops and their officers, one incident tells us just how severe it's become.

As Russian casualties continue increasing, with one report claiming 17,000, more than were lost in the entire Afghan war, so too does the frustration.

Nowhere is this devastating impact upon the Russians more apparent than casualties taken by Russia's 37th Motor Rifle Brigade.

The brigade of 1,500 soldiers, under the command of Gen. Yuri Medvedev, lost almost half its number. Perceiving their expendability by Medvedev, his own men drove over him in a tank as a battle with Ukrainians was raging, severely injuring him. While Medvedev was loaded onto a medevac vehicle, there are mixed reports as to whether or not he survived the attack.

Similar to its approach during the Afghan war, the Russian leadership is shipping its dead and wounded to its ally Belarus rather than back home for fear of triggering a Russian citizenry no longer willing to roll over and accept their government's denial that the war is not going well. A French news video by TV5 Monde showed Russia's dead arriving in train cars in Belarus.

Apparently having misjudged their supply of body bags, the Russians transported the fallen wrapped in clear plastic sheets tied at both ends. Belarus morgues and hospitals are reportedly packed.

At some point, Putin will learn an invaluable lesson.

Despite his desire to restore Russia to the days of the former Soviet Union, his own people are unsupportive as they hear the cries of the Zinky Boys echoing from his war in Ukraine.

Putin's 'pucker factor'

Sat, 26 Mar 2022 03:46:45 GMT

PUTIN'S "PUCKER FACTOR"

James G. Zumwalt / March 25, 2022

World Net Daily ... Despite the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1991 and the reemergence, absent its collection of enslaved East European buffer states, as "Russia," something old has merged with something new under the tutelage of President/Dictator Vladimir Putin.

Under the USSR's old leadership and Putin's leadership today, the art of skillfully assassinating opponents has always been in vogue.

In 1978, a Bulgarian activist and playwright who had defected to the West in 1969, Georgi Ivanov Markov , 49, took ill and quickly died in London. As a radio announcer broadcasting anti-communist stories to Bulgaria and elsewhere, Markov always feared assassination.

Just before he died, he shared that a stranger had bumped into him the evening prior as he walked across a bridge, jabbing him in his leg with an umbrella. A post-mortem exam discovered a tiny puncture wound there.

The very small pellet recovered from Markov's body – only 1.7 millimeters in diameter (smaller than a pinhead) – was revealing. It was so tiny, it ruled out a range of poisons that could have been used because they would require larger doses. The pellet was telling too in that it consisted of 90% platinum and 10% iridium – not common use materials and not the work product of a Third World nation.

It was later determined the pellet contained ricin.

In 2020, despite briefly joining the community of democratic nations, Russia resorted back to its old Soviet ways of poisoning opponents. Putin's nemesis was Alexi Navalny who is a Russian politician, lawyer and, perhaps most upsetting to Putin and his oligarch cabal, an anti-corruption activist .

After meeting with two men and having a cocktail, Navalny caught a domestic flight and became deathly ill. He had to be rushed to Germany, where he spent months recovering. Since Putin failed to kill him, when Navalny returned to Russia, he was arrested, tried on trumped up charges and imprisoned.

He was just recently sentenced to nine more years in prison on additional charges as Putin obviously fears his release now might become a rallying cry for the opposition.

It is clear, however, from these attacks as well as others that poison seems to be the weapon of choice for Russian government critics. It explains too why Putin has his own official food taster.

The term "pucker factor" is a scale by which one – experiencing a sense of fear in anticipation of some occurrence – assigns a numerical value of between 1 and 10, with 10 being the worst, to identify his present level of fright.

As the war in Ukraine continues generating discontent in Russia among the civilian population and a realization by Putin's military forces that what they were originally told would be a peacekeeping operation there is not, domestic opposition to their president's war is increasing. One would think, therefore, Putin's pucker factor is up around the 10 level.

In an effort to reverse an embarrassing performance by the Russian army due to stiff Ukrainian resistance, Putin is committing more and more military force to the invasion. The Russian people who were enjoying the good life and a healthy economy pre-invasion are experiencing the negative impact of the sanctions destroying their economy.

The shocking impact was quick, as the day after the invasion they awoke to find the ruble severely devalued.

The benefit of cellphones has enabled young Russian soldiers to contact family members to share what is really going on in Ukraine. Of the calls of thousands of Russian mothers attempting to reach their sons, many will never be returned as casualties continue to mount. Casualties have been so high, trains are being used to return bodies to Russia.

Thousands of Russians have protested the war. A Russian television news editor criticized the war live as have Russian artists.

Even an oligarch or two has expressed disdain over the invasion. It is safe to assume that right now Putin is not the most popular person in the country.

Against this backdrop, a statement was issued by a Ukrainian intelligence official that a group of Russian elites is planning to overthrow Putin. While the group remained unnamed, the Ukrainian official did name the person who was being considered to replace Putin – Russia's director of the Federal Security Service ( FSB ) and a member of his inner circle – Alexander Bortnikov.

Since FSB is a successor agency to the infamous Soviet KGB, it was suggested the two men had had a falling out as Putin blamed Bortnikov for making "fatal miscalculations" in planning and executing the invasion.

The Ukrainian statement indicated, "Poisoning, sudden illness, accident – Russia's elite is considering removing Putin."

While such a statement could be mere propaganda to impact Putin's pucker factor, Ukraine intelligence reported in the past that their own president was able to escape three Russian assassination attempts due to FSB officers, who disagree with Putin's invasion, providing advance warning about them.

Whether this too was Ukrainian propaganda, soon after Putin arrested both the FSB head and his deputy. Undoubtedly, the battlefield stalemate in Ukraine coupled with such statements from Ukrainian intelligence must be contributing to the Putin pucker factor.

Sen. Lindsey Graham has been very vocal in his criticism of Putin, even encouraging the Russian people to assassinate their leader.

As the Senator explains, "If he continues to be their leader, then he's going to make you complicit with war crimes, You're a good people, you'll never have a future, you'll be isolated from the world, and you'll live in abject poverty. So I'm hoping somebody in Russia will understand that he's destroying Russia, and you need to take this guy out by any means possible."

Another high-profile person to plead with the Russians to remove their leader is body-builder and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

He sent them a video explaining that their president was the real aggressor in the Ukraine war – something the U.N. agrees with evidenced by its 141-4 vote. "It is a humanitarian crisis," Schwarzenegger added. "Because of its brutality, Russia is now isolated from the society of nations."

He told them they are not being told the truth about the war and the impact on Russia itself or acknowledging that "thousands of Russian soldiers have been killed. They have been caught between Ukrainians fighting for their homeland and the Russian leadership fighting for conquest."

Putin will try his best to prevent access to comments such as those of Graham and Schwarzenegger as he knows they hold the one weapon capable of maximizing his pucker factor as it turns his people against him – truth.

One thing we will not see in the days ahead is Putin visiting his front-line troops in Ukraine to bolster morale. Doing so would undoubtedly subject him to targeting by both sides.

How to end Russia's war by circumventing Putin

Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:15:09 GMT

HOW TO END RUSSIA'S WAR BY CIRCUMVENTING PUTIN

James G. Zumwalt / March 23, 2022

World Net Daily ... Just like a rare combination of adverse meteorological factors can give rise to a "perfect storm," a rare combination of adverse factors – both historical and current – exist concerning Russian President Vladimir Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

They lend themselves to a somewhat different approach toward ending the conflict – one circumventing the Russian leader.

Let us examine the factors at play in this perfect storm of opportunity.

For Russians, the invasion has been a wake-up call. What they envisioned as a 72-hour military operation, ending with a Putin victory lap, has bogged down. Victory has eluded them for internal reasons, poor logistics, and external, a determined Ukrainian opposition. It should cause senior Russian military officials to reflect upon 20th century history lessons.

In 1979, the Russians invaded Afghanistan for just the opposite reason, seeking to bolster a communist government. Invasion gave way to quagmire as their occupation lasted a decade before reality showed their objectives were unattainable.

In 1992, three years after their withdrawal, Afghanistan's pro-Russian government collapsed, although it did last longer than the Soviet Union, which folded in December 1991.

A factor contributing to the Soviet Union's collapse was the Russian public's war opposition. There may well be some senior Russian officers for whom the Afghan failure remains a personal experience of their early career

In 1979 as well, China invaded Vietnam, sparked by Hanoi's toppling of a pro-China government in Cambodia. Despite China's military superiority, the Vietnamese fought vigorously. The incursion lasted a month before China withdrew.

While both sides claimed victory, the fact China lost almost three times as many soldiers as Vietnam supports Hanoi's claim. But, for Russian military history students, the lesson here – one now applicable to the Ukraine situation – is never underestimate the fight in the dog when invading his territory.

In addition to historical lessons contributing to the perfect storm, there are current factors as well.

A sure indicator of the fight in the dog is its ability to launch counterattacks. The goal of the invader is to so overpower domestic forces so as to disable their ability to do so. After China invaded Vietnam, the latter initiated counterattacks, giving the Chinese a measure of their fighting spirit. As a result, China was smart to withdraw after only a month.

Similarly, Ukraine is conducting such attacks against Russia, which now has a good measure of the dog in the fight. Similarly, a Russian military withdrawal mindset must be developing.

Dictator Putin, who has led Russia for over two decades, after successfully transitioning the country from its brief fling as a democracy, is used to a compliant public. However, his invasion decision has released a dormant public ire.

Oligarchs, members of the Russian media, artists and thousands of similarly minded average citizens have publicly aired opposition. It has caused Putin, in true dictatorial fashion, to crack down, implementing laws against protests and against publishing anti-government positions.

Russia's invasion is costing it dearly, taking an unexpectedly high toll in lost personnel and equipment.

Casualties between 6,000-12,000 are estimated. Soldiers were misinformed about the invasion, either told it would be quick or Ukrainians would welcome them. Many Russians have surrendered or reportedly have self-inflicted wounds , using Ukrainian rather than Russian caliber weapons to do so so as not to attract suspicion.

Video of ambushed Russian columns reveal little training as their reactions are antithetical to military doctrine. Meanwhile, economic sanctions on Russia are wreaking havoc.

A noticeable transition in confidence from the invader to the defender is occurring, evidenced by a gradual softening in cease-fire demands by Russia and hardening by Ukraine.

Russian military leaders understand, much better than Putin, who has never been in combat let alone worn a military uniform, what they are up against.

Such experience is undoubtedly playing on their minds as they struggle to achieve goals on the ground demanded by Putin they know they cannot achieve as fighting seems to have come to a stalemate.

All the above factors indicate a foundational crack in what has long appeared to be block support for Putin.

Thus, a cease-fire approach must be taken seeking to expand this crack by appealing to Putin's generals (at least the live ones as Ukrainians have killed at least four already) on another facet of warfare they well understand – war crimes.

As Russia turned Ukraine into a battlefield, cellphone video capability became a "weapon" for Ukrainian citizens who have been recording evidence of war crimes. These range from bombing a childrens' hospital, maternity ward and civilian bomb shelters to using vacuum bombs and opening "safe" civilian evacuation routes only to lace them with butterfly mines dropped by air.

Russia's blanket bombing of civilian targets in the seaport of Mariupol appears to be nothing but an intentional war crimes initiative. Collected data shows at least 27 attacks launched against health care facilities and hospitals. This criminal activity is the result of undisciplined troops pressured by commanders to subdue Ukrainian resistance.

An effort must be made to ensure senior Russian military officers understand the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) will prosecute to the fullest those responsible for such war crimes.

Since the ICC will only take action if Russia fails to prosecute these crimes – which is a given – Russia's generals must be convinced the world sees Putin as a madman, content to see thousands on both sides die, simply to recognize his dream of a reconstituted Soviet Union. Thus, the only force capable of stopping him is the Russian military.

Senior military officials must be persuaded to take action on their own, in any way possible, to stop the war by a date certain, for which war crime immunity will be granted, or, alternatively, they will be prosecuted to the max.

Regardless, there will no immunity for Putin. A pitch also must be made to the Russian people supporting their protests and educating them on Putin's destruction of their economy.

The international community has already demonstrated it will take whatever time is needed to bring war criminals to trial, as was done with Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic for 66 crimes including genocide.

History will also ensure the names of indicted Russian officials will never be forgotten. Meanwhile, all assets of Putin – such as his $700 million yacht seized in Italy – found outside Russia should be sold and used to fund Ukraine's reconstruction.

While generals convicted as war criminals would be safe from incarceration within Russia, they would be condemning themselves to life in a country ruled by a ruthless dictator whom we already have seen turn on his own citizens for opposing his war. Unable to leave Russia, these criminals never know when Putin might turn on them for their embarrassing military performance in Ukraine.

Additionally, they will be left to suffer the consequences of a destroyed Russian economy as well.

The Russian people have demonstrated immense courage in their anti-war, anti-Putin protests. It is time senior Russian military officials demonstrate the same.

Smollett's lesson – all for the want of a Subway sandwich

Sat, 19 Mar 2022 00:16:19 GMT

SMOLLETT'S LESSON: ALL FOR THE WANT OF A SUBWAY SANDWICH

James G. Zumwalt / March 18, 2022

World Net Daily ... For the want of a nail the shoe was lost, For the want of a shoe the horse was lost, For the want of a horse the rider was lost...

...For the want of a rider the battle was lost...and, soon enough, the kingdom was lost...And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.

The proverb above, penned long ago by Benjamin Franklin, tells us how an initial loss of a relatively minor item can lead to a series of losses having ever-increasing impact, ultimately resulting in a much greater loss. Ironically, it was the "want" of a minor item by "hate crime" hoaxer Jussie Smollett – a Subway sandwich – that proved to be his undoing.

Smollett – a black actor on the television program "Empire" – gained national attention on Jan. 29, 2019, when he claimed he was attacked in the dead of the night while walking down a Chicago street at 2 a.m. after buying a Subway sandwich. He described his two attackers as white, wearing ski masks and red hats and shouting out "This is MAGA country."

He claimed they also carried a rope, tied to form a noose, which they placed around his neck.

After the attack, Smollett returned to his apartment and called police. When they arrived, the actor was still wearing the noose.

Police rounded up the film from numerous cameras along Smollett's route home, including the location of the attack as well as his return to his apartment.

It is estimated between 24-26 officers were involved in investigating the crime, spending more than 3,000 hours doing so with at least half that time dedicated to reviewing surveillance footage.

While officers kept an open mind during the investigation, there were clearly issues that jumped out at them. The early morning hours of Jan. 29 was one of the coldest days of the year, raising the question how someone even motivated by racial hatred could be out looking for victims. Additionally, why would anyone go out to get a sandwich at such a time and in freezing weather?

However, what undoubtedly was most intriguing was that Smollett returned to his apartment with his sandwich still completely intact. Had there been an attack, wouldn't the sandwich have somehow been jostled about, thrown to the ground, stepped on or otherwise damaged? Yet Smollett's sandwich survived unscathed.

And, wouldn't a victim who had just been mugged be eager to depart very quickly rather than lingering to retrieve a sandwich? It was subsequently acknowledged the sandwich became a key to solving the case.

Traditionally, detectives follow investigations to wherever the evidence leads. Any victim of such an attack, having a keen interest in ensuring those responsible were caught, would fully cooperate. They would recognize that investigators have an obligation to examine all possibilities, including any evidence absolving the victim's participation in a possible hoa

In this vein, Smollett was asked to submit his cellphone for examination; however, he quickly became less cooperative.

As more and more evidence pointed to a Smollett hoax, especially after two brothers who were friends of the actor admitted to being hired to stage the attack, a real noose began tightening around him as a suspect rather than a victim. Video even showed Smollett's car driving by the scene of the attack a few days beforehand as if conducting reconnaissance of the attack site.

Smollett was ultimately convicted on five of six counts of felony disorderly conduct – a charge applied to filing fake police reports under Illinois law. Although he faced a possible three-year prison sentence, Smollett received a 150-day jail sentence, along with 30 months probation, and was ordered to pay $120,000 in restitution plus a $25,000 fine.

Smollett never was willing to acknowledge responsibility for the hoax.

At his sentencing hearing, the judge dressed Smollett down for an hour, describing him as a despicable person who divided America even more during a difficult time of racial tension. He added that Smollett's "arrogant" and "narcissistic" behavior damaged the integrity of claims made by real hate crime victims.

Smollett's family, operating his Instagram account, still seek to foment racial tensions by claiming his attackers were white and promoting the outrageous suggestion, "You don't have to believe in his innocence to believe he should be free."

Sadly, according to a former Chicago police chief , Smollett could have easily avoided all this with a mere slap on the hand had he simply admitted lying to police when the investigation's evidence pointed to the actor.

Chicago is an historically high-crime area – one that has become more so after liberals began their "defund the police" initiative. It has created a shortage of police as many have resigned, recognizing the greater risks being placed upon them.

Hoaxes like Smollett's tie up Chicago's very limited police assets at a time more law enforcement is needed. The Chicago Police Department is now suing him to recoup the estimated $130,000 it spent investigating the hoax.

Despite the racial hoax he conducted, Smollett demonstrated no remorse at sentencing and, in fact, only embarrassed himself further by making several outbursts claiming his innocence despite the overwhelming evidence that convicted him. Still endeavoring to play the race card up to the end, he contended the only reason he received jail time was because he is black.

After only one week in jail, he was released , pending an appeal, after signing a $150,000 recognizance bond that did not require him to post any money. Allegedly, Smollett's motivation for the hoax was to entice more pay from his "Empire" producers.

Having now lost employment and faced with payments of fines, restitution, continuing legal fees and with possibly even more restitution payments to follow, what Smollett hoped would bring financial reward has had a reverse impact. Sadly, for want of personal gain, he had no concerns about contributing to America's racial divide.

Ironically, in the end, a racial hoax was lost, all for the want of a Subway sandwich.

Would Putin leave U.S. astronaut alone in space?

Thu, 17 Mar 2022 03:51:18 GMT

WOULD PUTIN LEAVE U.S. ASTRONAUT ALONE IN SPACE?

James G. Zumwalt / March 16, 2022

World Net Daily ... With Russian President Vladimir Putin threatening action against the U.S. should it inject itself in any capacity into the war he started with Ukraine, where is the most precarious place for an American to find himself at this particular time?

It is a place putting the individual in such a helpless situation that he cannot relocate until diplomacy or another actor intervenes to rescue him. But despite this, so unique is this individual's situation that within minutes, he finds himself, at certain times of the day, just 250 miles away from either of the capitals of the two nations responsible for his fate.

The individual in question is Mark Vande Hei – a U.S. astronaut who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time – specifically, in orbit 250 miles up in space onboard the International Space Station (ISS).

A modular "habitable artificial satellite" for which the first component was launched in 1998 through the cooperative efforts of several nations, ISS has served as a temporary home in space for astronauts representing multiple countries.

March 30 will mark 355 days that Vande Hei has been in space, giving him the record for the longest time aboard ISS. He is orbiting alongside two Russian astronauts with all three scheduled to return to earth on March 30, courtesy of a Russian reentry vehicle. Their final earthly plunge is to be made in a capsule parachuting into Kazakhstan.

However, in a crass move triggered by resentment over U.S. sanctions implemented against Moscow for its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, Russian space officials are now suggesting Vande Hei may have to find an alternative way home.

Dmitry Rogozin, head of Roscocosmos, Russia's space agency, has threatened to isolate its part of the ISS, bringing Russian astronauts Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov back while leaving Vande Hei behind as its sole resident. This is totally contrary to the cooperative spirit the two nations have shared from the outset of the launch of the ISS.

While U.S. sanctions are having a serious impact both on Russia's aerospace and Roscocosmos programs, Rogozin's deranged threat, obviously made with Putin's concurrence, goes beyond the pale.

After initial reaction to the threat, Russian officials now reportedly are describing it as a joke. Don't be too sure.

Vande Hei's time in space was originally only to be six months; however, additional testing on the impact of space on the human body necessitated a six month extension.

Should the Russians make good on their threat, another space vehicle is available to bring Vande Hei back home. But it represents the height of irresponsibility for Putin to use our astronaut – precariously caught up in a situation where he is dependent upon Russian assistance, at least for the moment, to return home – as a political pawn.

It demonstrates just how ruthless a dictator Putin really is.

Fearful of upsetting Putin, President Joe Biden has proven unhelpful in meeting several requests made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for assistance in defending against the Russian invaders. Accordingly, Zelensky reached out earlier to the founder of SpaceX, American entrepreneur Elon Musk, to provide internet satellite coverage which the Russians had cut off.

Without any hesitation, Musk did so.

Should our do-nothing president fear bringing Vande Hei back home might also upset Putin, let us hope the astronaut has Musk's phone number as we know the SpaceX executive will get him back home by whatever means necessary.

Invading Ukraine and the Fickle Finger of Blame

Mon, 14 Mar 2022 19:01:12 GMT

INVADING UKRAINE AND THE FICKLE FINGER OF BLAME

James G. Zumwalt / March 12, 2022

AND Magazine ... The Ukrainians are not the only ones finding themselves under fire.

With Russia becoming more and more isolated within the world community for its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, America’s friends and foes alike are taking potshots at those they believe responsible for President Vladimir Putin’s madness in invading Ukraine. Rather than focusing responsibility where deserved, accusers look to place blame elsewhere.

Ironically, an enemy critic points the fickle finger of blame at a U.S. president whose main fault lies in doing nothing.

China’s embassy in Moscow claims the U.S. poses more of a threat to the planet than does Russia! In support of this, it provides a graphic listing the percentage of wars occurring between 1945 and 2001 supposedly launched by America–81%. Of course, such fake news fails to reflect what led up to these conflicts that left America with no other viable option than to fight.

China’s relationship with Russia is such that it refuses to even join the world community in calling the Russian military operation into Ukraine what it is–an invasion. Accordingly, Beijing announced it will continue “normal trade cooperation” with Russia.

There should be no doubt China’s U.S. finger-pointing is the act of a biased Russian ally.

Indications are that China had asked Putin not to launch his Ukrainian invasion until after the Winter Olympics, which Beijing was hosting, so as not to distract from its opportunity to try to shine a positive spotlight of itself on the world stage. (China denies this.) Putin chose to honor this request as we now know China was also helping Russia fund the invasion.

This conclusion is reached based on the report that recent commercial deals between Russia and China significantly influenced the invasion from a financial perspective.

Just prior to the Olympics, an energy agreement was signed between the two, earning Moscow $117.5 billion in exchange for oil and gas. This sizable cushion obviously was negotiated to help Russia ride out sanctions Putin knew the West would impose.

In yet another example of Russia/China cooperation, the suspension of operations by Visa and MasterCard in Russia resulted in Russia announcing it was switching to a Chinese credit card system.

China’s outrageous claim about America being a bigger threat to the planet than Russia is made at a time we have a “do-nothing” president in office who is either spineless or clueless about what is going on.

Joe Biden’s foreign policy is one of simply telling Americans finding themselves in international hot spots to evacuate, failing then to bring the force of the U.S. government to help them do so.

A historic U.S. policy of “all for one and one for all” in ensuring the welfare of our citizens has transitioned into one of “every man for himself.” Little did we know the president who came to office campaigning on a policy of defunding domestic police forces would apply it to America’s international policeman’s role as well.

Biden’s foreign policy has embarrassed us around the world, encouraging our enemies to pursue their sinister goals. It is symbolized by the tortoise, retracting totally into its shell at the hint of danger. How China perceives this as a world threat – especially by dictators such as its own – is pure propaganda.

Meanwhile, “friends” at home promote their own political viewpoints on whom to blame based on a deep seeded hatred of former President Donald Trump, whom they claim is responsible.

Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman is one such critic playing politics.

He had previously played a role in attempting to get Trump impeached while in office for having floated an alleged deal by Ukraine’s president, offering U.S. military aid in exchange for conducting a corruption investigation into business dealings in Ukraine of the son of then-Democratic presidential candidate Biden.

Vindman outlandishly suggests , “It is because of Trump’s corruption that we have a less capable, less prepared Ukraine.” While “absolutely” assigning blame to Trump, Vindman makes no reference to the hands Hunter got dirty in Ukraine and the fatherly assistance helping him do so.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky seeks to restore logic to the blame game, pointing responsibility at Biden for doing nothing, despite Zelensky’s urging, to impose sanctions on Russia before the invasion was launched, giving Putin a better understanding about how devastating they would be. Putin already calls the sanctions–yet to be maximized–akin to a declaration of war.

The only action Biden took prior to the invasion was, in typical Biden fashion, the wrong one to undertake. After our intelligence people obtained the Russian invasion plans, Biden decided to share them with China.

What he expected to achieve by doing this is a mystery, but Beijing’s reaction was unsurprising – it immediately turned the plans over to Russia which, as a result, now has a much better appreciation for our intelligence collecting capabilities.

Ukraine has given up hope our do-nothing president will do anything, evidenced by how Zelensky directly communicates with others, like Elon Musk, for assistance. When the Russians cut off Ukraine’s internet, Musk complied with Zelensky’s request to provide numerous terminals from his Starlink broadband satellite system, enabling Ukrainians to re-establish contact.

Historians of a future era, independently examining the facts surrounding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, will likely arrive at the conclusion Putin sized up Biden correctly.

He was encouraged to act aggressively by Biden’s disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal and singular destruction of America’s energy independence. He knew the law of supply and demand would kick in with America’s demand being met by Russia’s supply.

For Putin, invasion was a no-brainer.

More than half of Russia’s exports (53.8%) in 2021 were fuel and energy products. With Russia able to get top dollar from friendly nations and desperate oil-starving unfriendly ones, countering the impact of Western sanctions, Putin saw his dream of reclaiming a piece of the Soviet empire coming true.

Putin's 2 'unknown unknowns'

Thu, 10 Mar 2022 11:06:43 GMT

PUTIN'S 2 "UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS"

James G. Zumwalt / March 9, 2022

World Net Daily ... The late Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was known for making controversial and sometimes nonsensical comments that caused listeners to reflect upon the intended meaning.

During a briefing in February 2002 concerning Iraq and whether it could have given terrorists weapons of mass destruction despite no evidence it did so, he famously said the following...

..."As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know."

While the quote may sound a bit confusing, the message is this: In making any decision to act, and particularly when the impact involves foreign actors, while there will always be questions with answers known and unknown, there may well be questions unanticipated arising as well that, as such, were never asked nor answered.

No amount of prior planning identifies unknown unknowns, which, upon occurring, potentially can disrupt a planned result.

During the past several days, Russian President Vladimir Putin has discovered firsthand two major unknown unknowns that have come back to haunt him during the Ukraine invasion.

The first of these really should not have qualified as an unknown unknown but, probably due to Russian overconfidence, did so. The second, however, clearly qualifies as an unknown unknown for the impossibility it could have been foreseen.

As to the first, confident they would sweep through Ukraine like a hot knife through butter, the Russians were caught flat-footed by the stiff resistance encountered. Communication intercepts among Russian units revealed confusion on the battlefield. They also reveal low morale not only due to Ukrainian resistance but also due to supply lines leaving Russians without food, fuel and ammo.

Stiff resistance on the battlefield is always a concern – and, therefore, a known unknown. It is irresponsible the Russians failed to recognize it as such, to be factored in ahead of time, instead choosing to simply dismiss it, based on what they believed would be a blitzkrieg operation, as an unknown unknown.

Within the last few days, however, it is the second unknown unknown that undoubtedly has caught Putin completely off guard.

Putin sent mercenaries out from the Russian-backed Wagner group as well as Chechen special forces teams to assassinate Ukraine's charismatic President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose Churchillian style keeps his people fighting on. Three attempts on his life have thus far ended in failure – two by the former and one by the latter.

However, an unknown unknown contributed to the interception and elimination of the assassins. Unbelievably, intelligence concerning these attempts was shared in advance with the Ukrainians by Putin's own Federal Security Service (FSB) – the KGB's successor agency.

As confirmed by Ukrainian Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov, "I can say that we have received information from the FSB who today do not want to take part in this bloody war. And thanks to this, I can say that [Chechen leader Ramzan] Kadyrov's elite group was destroyed directly, which came here to eliminate our president."

In time of war, unknown unknowns can easily sound a death knell for those impacted accordingly on the battlefield. In Zelensky's case, it came into play with the reverse impact of saving his life three times. Just as importantly, it demonstrates even the FSB considers Putin's invasion of the Ukraine an ego trip in no way benefiting the plight of the Russian people.

Unfiltered news about issues plaguing the Ukraine invasion are educating the Russian people on what is occurring there. This is despite the tight rein Putin has maintained over the media for years. While his control over print, radio and television is secure, internet outlets are undermining the propagandist facade Putin's mainstream media portray.

Undoubtedly, he regrets his failure to erect a firewall as China did.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., recently opined someone in Russia should assassinate Putin, justifying it in the same sense as Brutus assassinated Caesar and Col. Claus von Stauffenberg attempted to assassinate Adolf Hitler.

Graham tweeted, "The only way this (invasion) ends is for somebody in Russia to take this guy out. You would be doing your country – and the world – a great service."

Ex-pat tech entrepreneur Alex Konanykhin, who fled Russia to the U.S. after a failed kidnap attempt by rogue KGB agents, offered a $1 million dollar bounty to any Russian officer who, "complying with their constitutional duty," arrests Putin as a war criminal.

FSB opposition to Putin's invasion plan may be just the start of an effort to unravel the dictator's power base.

Should he remain committed to piecing together again the puzzle that once was the Soviet Union – at great cost to his country economically and militarily – he would be well advised to keep looking behind his back.

Russia Ignored U.S.'s Kuwait Invasion Success Factors Prepping For Their Ukraine Incursion

Sat, 05 Mar 2022 16:09:55 GMT

RUSSIA IGNORED OUR KUWAIT-INVASION SUCCESS FACTORS PREPPING FOR UKRAINE INVASION

James G. Zumwalt / March 5, 2022

AND Magazine ... One key to a successful military operation is communication. Perhaps Russia is discovering this too late as it is in the second week of its invasion of Ukraine – an operation already lasting much longer than anticipated.

Invading Ukraine, Russia obviously failed to grasp the import of good communications enhancing unit coordination and timely responses to evolving situations on the battlefield.

Nor does it appear the Russians gave too much thought to establishing their logistical supply lines.

Both of these factors above contributed greatly to America’s immense success during the Persian Gulf War (1990-1991). They were factors resulting in Saddam Hussein’s army, ranked the world’s fourth- largest at the time, being defeated in a four-day ground war after Iraq’s unprovoked invasion of Kuwait.

While other factors influenced a quick resolution to the war against Iraq as well, such as open desert terrain, some of the same factors making Hussein’s army look impressive on paper but hollow in combat are plaguing the Russians.

When the Persian Gulf War ended, this author was able to interrogate a number of Iraqi army senior commanders. The most astonishing lesson learned was the absence of communication. It was so lacking that many Iraqi commanders had no idea what Iraqi units were operating on their flanks and knew even less about the U.S. forces they were confronting.

Iraqi commanders acknowledged that despite their impressive array of weaponry, they had never conducted combined arms training to familiarize their units on how to interact together on the battlefield. But why were such training and communications ignored?

Undoubtedly, it boiled down to a dictator’s sense of security.

The one thing dictators fear more than anything else is a coup. Because Hussein feared this, he would never allow all his military commanders to train together. He worried leaving them alone might be conducive to their plotting against him. He felt safer having them train separately so they had no opportunity to determine if their peers were coup-inclined or not.

Another factor reflecting upon the Iraqi army’s poor performance during the conflict was that little effort was made to explain to the average soldier what was going on. While some knew they would be fighting U.S. forces, few realized the U.S. was part of a 35-nation coalition , including several other Arab countries, organized to evict Iraq from Kuwait.

Thus, a conflict Hussein promised would be the “ Mother of all Battles” fizzled as the Iraqi army had been stripped of its fighting spirit, deprived of training to hone its combat skills, and left in a state of ignorance by its leaders.

As noted, American forces, which provided the backbone of the operation to evict Iraq from Kuwait, achieved their mission in a four-day ground war, despite having to transport men, equipment, and supplies thousands of miles, positioning same in neighboring Saudi Arabia before entering Kuwait.

As U.S. forces quickly advanced into Kuwait, we also had to establish logistical supply lines. But at no time during the conflict were U.S. forces deprived of fuel, ammunition, or food.

Such has not been the case for the Russian invaders.

Despite having positioned an invading force of 150,000-200,000 on its border with Ukraine and faced with establishing much shorter logistical supply lines after the “ peacekeeping ” operation began, Russia has witnessed what was supposed to be a blitzkrieg invasion, along the lines of what the U.S. accomplished in Kuwait, bog down due to logistical nightmares.

Radio intercepts of Russian forces in Ukraine reveal there are serious communication problems, causing them to be in “complete disarray” according to British intelligence sources. Units are bogged down for lack of fuel and Russian soldiers are unable to fight for lack of ammunition.

These intercepts also reveal the Russians are demoralized – some units have gone days without food. The low morale and lack of concern of senior commanders to address the needs of their fighting force have resulted in soldiers sabotaging their own vehicles by punching holes in their gas tanks and others surrendering.

Conversations show some signs of moral courage among Russian troops that, in at least one case, refused to carry out an order from central command to conduct an artillery strike on Ukrainian civilians (referred to as “the goods”).

Other intercepts reveal parties losing their tempers, insulting each other, or crying as they talk. Some communications report soldiers taking action on their own, withdrawing back to Russia.

No effort seems to be made by commanders to stop open communications by their troops using devices, such as walkie-talkies, that can easily be monitored. This also allows evidence about war crimes to be collected.

Additionally, there has been little communication down the chain of command as to what the Russian soldiers were told about going into Ukraine. Many Russian prisoners have reported they were led to believe they were on a training mission.

A text message recovered from the cell phone of a slain soldier revealed he had sent his mother a message about how they were on a training mission one minute and a combat mission the next. He wrote “I’m afraid” before being killed minutes later.

Those who did recognize they were undertaking an invasion of Ukraine were told it would be a cakewalk.

Ukraine reports that ‘cakewalk’ has so far killed an estimated 5,300 Russian soldiers.

Undoubtedly, Putin was told by his military commanders his invasion force was adequate to do the job. At some point, to deflect blame from himself, Putin will definitely hold his commanders accountable.

The longer Russia’s beleaguered blitzkrieg takes to complete, and the fact it may need assistance from its Belarus ally to do so, has been an absolute embarrassment for Putin. He is being forced to go additional rounds against a militarily weaker nation but one armed with an unflappable national spirit.

As Putin may still bully the West with his nuclear arms, his aggression in Ukraine has demonstrated his conventional force – as far as NATO should be concerned – may well just be a tail-chasing paper tiger.

SCOTUS selection through the eyes of the NFL

Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:59:34 GMT

SCOTUS SELECTION THROUGH THE EYES OF THE NFL

James G. Zumwalt / Published March 2, 2022

World Net Daily ... In 2020, at least 70% of National Football League (NFL) players were black. This was not the result of an intentional hiring practice but of a performance-related one.

Top performers, when it comes to speed, strength and agility on the gridiron, are overwhelmingly black. This is also a factor within the Women's National Basketball Association where 68.5% of players are African-American.

Black NFL players over-represent, by tenfold, our African-American male population. Thus, if a coach announced his goal was to field a much more diverse team – more accurately mirroring America's racial makeup of a white majority – he would necessarily have to limit selection to a pool of only white candidates.

Such a decision would almost surely generate irate fans ultimately bearing witness to their team's deteriorating performance.

The reality is that NFL success clearly turns on performance and not on diversity. Thus, only the top performers, regardless of race, are selected to play – and black athletes overwhelmingly fit the high-performance bill.

Interestingly, one NFL playing position under-represented by black players for many years was quarterback. Social justice warriors jumped all over this. Not until 2017 did all 32 active NFL teams start at least one black quarterback and by 2020, 10 of 32 starting quarterbacks were black.

However, no one today criticizes the inequities of a player selection process overwhelmingly benefiting blacks over whites, specifically because it is based on performance.

Everyone associated with an NFL team – owner, coach, players and fans – all want a winner. What is important is playing a 17-game season , qualifying for postseason play, going on to win the Super Bowl and proving you are the best of the best.

But, what if the NFL made the irrational decision that postseason single elimination games would no longer determine Super Bowl finalists? What if it decided the final two teams to compete had to be geographically diverse, representing different regions of the country, as selected by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?

For the team benefiting from this selection process and then going on to win the Super Bowl, the haunting question will always be whether it really represented the best the NFL had to offer.

Clearly such a process would be unfair to players, regardless of race, who had worked hard to win games but were not selected by Goodell to represent the league in the final contest.

During his 2020 presidential campaign, Joe Biden promised , if elected and a position opened up on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), he would nominate a black female. With the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, Biden, in a rare act, made good on his promise, nominating D.C. Circuit Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace him.

While Biden significantly reduced the pool of qualified jurists by making gender and race pre-qualifications, he dismissed dozens of other candidates equally or possibly even better qualified.

This denied us from the outset a guarantee that the best of the best were being considered, especially due to an inherent flaw in Biden's nominee selection process.

To help identify his nominee, Biden engaged Minyon Moore – an outside adviser actively involved in Kamala Harris' selection as the vice presidential nominee.

Moore is both a Critical Race Theory (CRT) promoter and a Black Lives Matter (BLM) board member. Given the title "Nomination Adviser for Engagement" responsible to "mobilize a nationwide engagement effort focused on confirmation," Moore unfairly put the search spotlight only on those having similar views.

Any SCOTUS nominee embracing BLM has questionable credentials as BLM is a Marxist ideology conflicting with the liberty-focused ideology espoused in the U.S. Constitution, which SCOTUS is obligated to uphold.

BLM's belief that only black, rather than all, lives matter is at odds with the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) the U.S. signed, recognizing the equality of all human life.

Thus, any U.S. government embrace of BLM runs afoul of the UDHR as well.

However, Secretary of State Antony Blinken outlandishly authorized U.S. embassies around the world to display the BLM flag on the first anniversary of the death of George Floyd, who was killed while resisting police arrest.

Blinken's rationalization was, "For the United States to be a credible force for human rights around the world, we have to face the realities of racism and hatred here at home." Sadly, his statement fails to face the realities of anti-white racism and hatred inherent within BLM's ideology.

The issue of U.S. government support for a racist BLM is bound, eventually, to come before the SCOTUS.

As for embracing CRT, a SCOTUS nominee is adhering to the belief that in life, white privilege is responsible for every aspect of black hardship. Thus, race issues coming before such a nominee would never receive fair adjudication.

Nor can we ignore that Judge Jackson was on a shortlist of candidates provided by a left-wing judicial activist organization financed by dark money – Arabella Advisors . This group spent over $1 billion putting Biden and Democratic senators into office and now looks to be rewarded for doing so.

Finally, eagerness to select specific gender/race requirements for a SCOTUS nominee overlooks Judge Jackson's competency in correctly interpreting the law.

Despite impressive education credentials, her decision record is discouraging – many reversed by fellow liberal judges. As such, she is not promoted as a faithful steward of the Constitution.

If Goodell were to select an NFL player of the year annually, one thing he would not do is limit selection to a single racial group as all players deserve consideration. The same is true of Biden's SCOTUS selection.

He wrongly eliminated a very deserving group of candidates simply to score a SCOTUS first. Fixing the selection game as he did will always leave people wondering if Jackson really represents the best of the best the judiciary had to offer.

Described as "the most radical judge ever nominated" for a SCOTUS seat, her numerous reversed decisions to date already tell us she is not among the best the judiciary has to offer.

Why so much black-on-Asian violence in America?

Sat, 26 Feb 2022 00:33:04 GMT

WHY SO MUCH BLACK-ON-ASIAN VIOLENCE IN AMERICA?

James G. Zumwalt / February 25, 2022

World Net Daily ... In broad daylight on April 23, 2021, Yao Pan Ma, 61, an out-of-work Chinese immigrant, was collecting cans in East Harlem in Manhattan, when he was suddenly attacked from behind. At only 114 pounds, Ma was no match for his black attacker, even if he had seen him coming.

Security cameras revealed Jarrod Powell, 50, hitting Ma, knocking him to the ground and then repeatedly kicking him in the head, face and neck. Four days later, Powell was arrested as Ma lay in the hospital.

Suffering traumatic brain injury, Ma was put into a medically induced coma and placed on life support. Never regaining consciousness, he died eight months later on the last day of the year.

In February 2022, charges against Powell were upgraded to murder as a hate crime. No stranger to police, Powell is an ex-con with a record dating back to 1988. With a $3 million cash bond set, society should be safe from him for a while.

On Nov. 22, 2021, a black attacker, later identified as Kevin Douglas – a man with 44 prior arrests – attacked an Asian woman, waiting for a subway train, from behind brutally beating and robbing her.

In 2010, Manhattan established a Hate Crimes Unit (HCU). Currently, 33 anti-Asian hate crime cases are being prosecuted by its district attorney – the most ever since HCU's establishment.

Nationally, anti-Asian hate crimes have increased by 339%. While this frightening statistic has received some coverage, an aspect of such crimes seemingly avoided by the media is that most of them, as in the two cases above, are dominated by black-on-Asian violence.

A 2008 survey by the San Francisco Police Department determined that 85% of that city's violent crimes were black-on-Asian.

National statistics for 2018 compiled by the Department of Justice tell us blacks committed more hate crimes against Asians than any other race.

While the black-on-Asian trend existed long before President Donald Trump's tenure, liberals endeavor to blame him for this by having called COVID-19 the "China virus" or "Kung Flu."

But this trend raises an interesting question liberals fail to address: Does systemic racism against Asians exist among blacks? The answer is important in considering the credibility of the Critical Race Theory (CRT) claim that systemic white privilege has hampered success among blacks.

Kenny Wu wrote "An Inconvenient Minority: The Attack on Asian American Excellence and the Fight for Meritocracy." The book explains Asian-Americans have become "an inconvenient minority" for CRT supporters who link the lack of success among blacks to white privilege. Wu points out, despite discrimination at the hands of both whites and blacks, Asian-Americans have flourished in America.

Such discrimination continues today, evidenced by Harvard University capping admissions due to such a large pool of Asian-American high achievers. Harvard revealed if all qualified Asian-Americans were admitted, they would comprise 43% of the student body, necessitating a cap.

Xu attributes Asian-American students' academic success to a number of factors, including an Asian culture that gives rise to "tiger mother" parenting . Unlike Western parenting styles where children's choices, passions and curiosities are supported, tiger mother parenting takes a tougher approach to preparing children for the future by establishing work habits and high performance standards.

While CRT seeks to enhance opportunities for blacks by playing the guilt card against whites, Asian-Americans do not buy into this argument. They accept the fact they will reap what they sow and therefore recognize hard work is necessary to achieve it.

Also of cultural import for Asians is the strong family environment of a two parent home. Asian-Americans recognize meritocracy is earned and not, as CRT would have us believe, a product of white privilege.

As much as liberals would like to ignore it, the inconvenient truth about Asian-Americans is that they have thrived in America.

This undermines the credibility of CRT's claim, if it is to be believed at all, white privilege is the culprit denying blacks success in their own right.

Further sinking CRT's boat is that Asian-American success transcends academia to practically every sector of the business world.

In just about every city where Asian-Americans have settled, they own and operate numerous businesses.

One can only wonder whether a reason for so much black-on-Asian violence and hatred then is the jealousy of recognizing the Asian-American minority has met with success over a much shorter period of time relative to their black minority brothers and sisters.

One would think black activists would embrace other minorities to create a unified front against discrimination. Sadly, they do not. In fact, BLM takes a contrary approach. It promotes hatred against a fellow minority – the Jews – which, nationally, is the most targeted religious group for hate crimes, experiencing a 90% increase in physical attacks in January compared to January 2021.

Louisville experienced such an incident on Feb. 14 when a BLM activist fired his weapon several times at a Jewish mayoral Democratic candidate, fortunately missing.

Ironically, the shooter had published a 2019 anti-gun article proclaiming "your life doesn't matter to gun-loving Republicans." As BLM paid the shooter's bond, he outrageously is now back out on the streets.

The most recent data , broken down by race, concerning children under 18 raised in single-parent homes, while not proof positive, supports the importance of providing a solid family structure to put children on the road to success.

In 2019, 64% of all black children grew up in single-parent homes compared to 24% white and only 15% Asian-American children. It would appear the "tiger mom" concept is a major contributor to their children's success.

It would come as no surprise, in analyzing the two above attacks of Asian victims, to learn both attackers were raised in single-parent homes, putting them behind the eight ball in life before they could even get started.

While Douglas' motive was clearly robbery, we will never know what triggered Powell to launch his brutal, unprovoked attack against Ma. However, jealousy at the sight of a competing minority income earner could well have been a factor.

It is time our politicians stop finger pointing and face the reality of what causes racial hatred. A good place to start would be rejecting CRT's white privilege ruse as the likely cause.

Abortion: A 'wombmate' has the right to survive

Thu, 24 Feb 2022 01:13:56 GMT

ABORTION: A "WOMB-MATE" HAS THE RIGHT TO SURVIVE

James G. Zumwalt / February 23, 2022

World Net Daily ... It is ironic timing. The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) later this year will determine whether its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, legalizing abortion, remains the law of the land.

Pro-life observers predict SCOTUS will render a life-changing decision while pro-abortionists obviously hope for a contrary result. The line drawn between pro-life and pro-abortion positions is based on opposing perceptions as to when human life begins.

At a minimum, pro-lifers embrace detection of a heartbeat , usually around the sixth week of pregnancy, as life's beginning; pro-abortionists, however, fail to give a fetus the dignity of human life, sometimes even after its immediate separation from the womb – i.e., infanticide. Today, the lives of millions of unborn babies rests upon whether SCOTUS will affirm or overrule Roe v. Wade.

But the timing of a SCOTUS decision is ironic due to a 2022 NASA undertaking. Perhaps preparing to make the "big reveal" – i.e., that alien life exists – NASA is enlisting a platoon of theologians to help it understand just how humans might react should intelligent life be discovered on another planet.

It is ironic that while we have yet to agree on planet Earth when human life begins, we are already trying to prepare humanity to accept discovery of life elsewhere in the universe. It raises the question whether we will even recognize such life on another planet when we see it due to our reluctance to recognize it here.

Such reluctance enables pro-abortionists to easily ignore the reality of what an aborted fetus experiences. It is not dissimilar to one of the most horrific forms of execution used during the Middle Ages.

It is the practice of quartering by which a victim's limbs are torn from one's body. It involved chaining the condemned's limbs to more than one moveable object – such as four horses – which were then galloped in opposite directions to rip the body apart. Oftentimes failing to work as intended, it resulted in deaths being agonizingly slow.

The terrorist group ISIS used the procedure on at least one female victim to tear her body apart with four vehicles.

Shockingly, we learn that five Planned Parenthood regional CEOs are earning more than $500,000 annually to continue this quartering procedure for killing the unborn. For some, abortion does pay.

While it may be easy for pro-abortionists to dismiss the pain a fetus must suffer as a human life undergoing such a procedure, more than 62 million of them have done so since Roe v. Wade became law.

While looking within the four corners of the Constitution, the 1973 high court appropriately did not find any federally mandated right to abortion, instead using the 14th Amendment's due process and equal protection clauses to birth the law.

With Roe's future uncertain, the pro-abortionist administration of President Joe Biden seeks to make it even easier to conduct abortions. His Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now enables death by mail. Previously requiring women seeking abortions to obtain pills from certified physicians, the FDA has approved mail-order pills from abortion suppliers via telemedicine consultations.

In an interesting step, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is forcing a vote Feb. 28 on the Women's Health Protection Act before SCOTUS can rule on Roe v. Wade. In part, the act seeks to enshrine the "right" of abortion into federal law, undoing all existing limitations imposed by state abortion laws.

Thus, it would effectively make pro-life legislation illegal. This is despite the fact, as mentioned previously, nowhere does the Constitution give the federal government the right to legislate abortions, which, therefore, should leave the states empowered to do as they choose.

If pro-lifers are correct and SCOTUS shoots down Roe v. Wade, we are very likely find a need to enlist NASA's theologians to comfort distraught pro-abortionists into accepting the fact that human life begins far earlier than they are willing to accept.

While a woman has the sole right to choose what she does with her body, that right has an expiration tag. Such a right enables her to determine whether to conceive or not, but once she allows conception, she yields all further rights to her "womb-mate."

By giving residency within her body to a human occupant in fetal form, she has now granted it a vested right to survive and cannot simply dismiss it.

Pro-abortionists view a fetus as an "intruder" that can, at a woman's sole discretion, be neutralized. Such a view is outrageous.

Women must accept the reality that, by having granted a fetus residency, they now have a womb-mate with whom the sole right to live or die rests.

And, like any living organism, he or she will choose to live – especially when the alternative choice involves the painful, inhuman process of quartering.

The social miscreants looking to defund police

Sat, 19 Feb 2022 01:03:23 GMT

THE SOCIAL MISCREANTS LOOKING TO DEFUND POLICE

James G. Zumwalt / February 18, 2022

World Net Daily ... In 2012, Muslims desecrated the grave sites of World War II soldiers from Western nations who had been buried in a cemetery in Libya. While inexcusable, the motivation for their dastardly actions can be linked to cultural insensitivity toward the West, ingrained into their psyche for a millennium by Islam, which teaches them to hate infidels as inferior beings.

In August 2021, a young woman approached a temporary memorial dedicated to one of Chicago's finest: female Police Officer Ella French, 29, killed days earlier in the line of duty. The woman grabbed the slain officer's photograph from a display, crumpled it up and then threw it to the floor.

On Feb. 9, 2022, the woman, identified as Chicago resident Anna N. Kochan, 26, a self-described anarchist-communist, was arrested for vandalizing the memorial. Perhaps in a moment of self-aggrandizement she intended to share later with friends, Kochan foolishly made a cellphone video of her actions – evidence that will now be used against her.

While Kochan's actions that day were inexcusable as well, unlike the Muslim desecrators above, hers cannot be rationalized as lacking cultural sensitivity. They can only be called out as the actions of a despicable and hateful individual lacking any sensitivity for respecting those who have fallen while protecting the public.

Kochan's name can now be added to the list of the social miscreants from Antifa and Black Lives Matter who have easily been manipulated to support a misguided "defund the police" movement that is proving deadly to public safety as national crime rates continue to rise.

In arresting Kochan, police took a bit of pleasure in cuffing her with the handcuffs belonging to Officer Carlos Yanoz, French's partner on the day she was killed.

Yanoz had been shot twice in the head and, although he survived, he will be permanently disabled. French and Yanoz were cowardly attacked by two brothers after the officers had made what seemingly was a non-threatening traffic stop. French's brother shared that his sister had joined the police force as "she's always believed in helping people that can't take care of themselves."

Responsibility for the police shootings must be shared with politicians who defy all logic in pushing the defund police movemen

By giving credibility to a movement that has yet to even offer a rational alternative – going to the ridiculous extreme of suggesting unarmed social workers replace armed police officers in certain cases – these politicians have basically declared "open season" on law enforcement whose jobs have now become immensely more dangerous.

Some Democrat-controlled cities, such as San Francisco and Albuquerque , are already using unarmed social workers for certain calls such as inebriation, homelessness, addiction and mental health – calls that supposedly do not involve a threat to public safety.

The problem with this approach is that it is impossible to know when a seemingly non-threatening incident can turn ugly, endangering the unarmed social workers involved and the public. Undoubtedly, when Officer French made a traffic stop that would end her life, she foresaw no such deadly threat.

The hypocrisy of the above politicians, especially those progressive legislative members of the group known as "The Squad," is evident by the fact, while singing the defund police tune, they are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to hire "armed" security guards for their own personal safety.

We need not wonder why their guards, in taking on such a security role, insist on being armed.

With midterm elections approaching and polls indicating a tidal wave Republican victory, Democrats now seem to be playing down their defund-police focus. However, the damage has already been done.

A lax law enforcement environment has been created by undermining police authority and implementing a softer prosecutorial system limiting the charges it will pursue, encouraging judges to set lower bail amounts for violent crimes

America has become a safe haven for those wishing to do harm to the public, which foreign, violent gangs, like MS-13, see as an invitation to do their work in the U.S. to take advantage of the reduced incarceration risks of doing so.

Kochan's actions above in disrespecting the memorial photograph of Officer French is a symptom of a disease much like COVID-19 – a senseless man-created disease.

While a Manhattan Project-like mindset was initiated to develop a vaccine for the coronavirus, the same mindset needs to be applied in educating the public about our men and women in blue and the challenges they face daily in making life and death decisions.

Yes, a few police make mistakes, but law enforcement today is suffering a much greater toll as 73 police deaths in the line of duty occurred in 2021, representing a 26-year high and a 59% increase over 2020. Telling too is that almost half of the 2021 deaths were due to ambushes, unprovoked attacks such as Officer French suffered.

Hopefully, Kochan will be convicted of vandalizing Officer French's memorial.

A good punishment for her would be for the judge to order she ride with police officers on patrol and write an essay explaining the challenges they face and why we have been fortunate to have officers like French and Yanoz choosing to man the thin blue line separating us from rampant lawlessness.

Congress and the charge of the Democratic 'Ism' Brigade

Thu, 17 Feb 2022 11:08:06 GMT

CONGRESS AND THE CHARGE OF THE DEMOCRATIC "ISM" BRIGADE

James G. Zumwalt / February 16, 2022

World Net Daily ... Whether on the battlefield or on the gridiron, it is said "the best defense is a good offense."

While legendary professional football coach Vince Lombardi is probably best remembered for the quote , it is one savored by the military as a strategic offensive principle of war. It promotes proactivity rather than passivity in order to disrupt an enemy's focus, ultimately hindering its ability to mount an opposing attack.

We are witnessing application of this strategy on almost a daily basis today in Congress where our legislators repeatedly muddy the waters of reasonable debate, hurling criticism after criticism against those opposing their positions on various issues.

Rather than debate issues, the offensive strategy we see initiated is the charge of the "ism" brigade by which opponents are deemed guilty of racism, sexism, or whatever other "ism" can be thought of at the time.

There was a Republican delegate who, having witnessed enough of these charges, recently rose to defend his party in the legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia – Nicholas J. Freitas. Perhaps he was motivated by congressional Democrats' most recent failed effort to pass a voting rights bill, having launched a campaign across the county accusing Republican opponents of racism.

While the bill would have ensured future Democratic election victories by undermining election integrity, Democrats claimed their Republican opponents were seeking a return to the Jim Crow laws of an earlier era.

Given the opportunity to speak as a "point of personal privilege," Freitas delivered a very eloquent three-minute response to the seemingly endless charges of "ism" brigades.

The delegate began by pointing out that one thing he has never done is to question the motivation of others in that body who disagreed with him on policy. He has never accused those on the other side of the aisle as being racist or sexist or un-Christian or a bigot, simply for having such policy disagreements.

However, the other side has not extended Republicans a similar courtesy. They make these outrageous "ism" claims, totally lacking evidentiary proof thereof.

Freitas added, "This has been the repeated narrative coming from certain members of the other side of the aisle. And there's been a lot of times we just sat here politely and took it. Mr. Speaker, not this time. I'm tired of it; my constituents are tired of it…

...When these claims are made … they are made in part against the people who elected to send us here. And I don't know a single person here in this Chamber that I would define as racist or sexist or bigoted. … So let's have a robust policy discussion...

...But if you're going to question the faith of the intentions of anybody who happens to disagree with you on policy, then you don't get to lecture us on compassion, tolerance or an open debate." Freitas received a standing ovation for his remarks.

One recently doing so accused Dr. Ben Carson, conservative black former HUD secretary, of crying "white tears" for voicing his opposition to Biden's announcement he would nominate a black woman to replace U.S. Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer.

Freitas obviously said what many conservatives have strongly believed based on liberal politicians' preference to malign opponents rather than debate concerns about their bills. It is an ironic tack for Democrats to take. After all, they are the party of the notorious black hate group, the Ku Klux Klan.

It was their party that, for over a century, promoted an anti-black agenda seeking to prevent post-slavery blacks from being elected to office. The first 23 blacks elected to Congress were all Republicans. Also interestingly, despite Democrats' racism claims , today the Republican Party's biggest fundraising stars are blacks.

Democrats have been so hyped up on "ism" charging they have, in fact, even used the claim against their own who have failed to vote with them. When moderate Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., failed to vote with fellow Democrats to abolish the filibuster, they were called racists.

In January 2021, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., proposed a rule change to eliminate the use in a document titled the "Rules of the House of Representatives" of gendered terms, such as father, mother, son and daughter, mandating the use of gender-neutral alternatives instead.

While this was a silly effort to appease the far left, Pelosi would have done better for herself and her party had she mandated eliminating the use of claims of "isms" against political opponents to avoid debate, fostering an environment more conducive to substantive debates on issues rather than launching personal attacks.

The video of a frustrated Freitas reaching the end of his rope of tolerance to admonish Democrats' use of "ism" battle cries to obfuscate legislative discussions is telling. While his speech on the practice was made to a limited bipartisan audience within the Virginia legislature, hopefully it will come to Pelosi's attention.

Pelosi has announced she has no intention to retire and will run again this year for her seat. In an imperfect world, should she somehow return for another term as speaker, if Republicans fail to retake the House, she needs to reconsider her role in terms of what Freitas has said.

The speaker's role is one of getting bills passed that are in the best interests of the public, encouraging bipartisan support to do so. Accordingly, it is a role that should encourage the speaker to focus Congress on holding substantive debates on legislation – not on conducting mudslinging attacks against opponents.

In colonial America, town criers walked the streets, making public announcements, declaring the time and assuring the townspeople "all is well." Today, in challenging their Republican opponents, Democrats refuse to debate issues, preferring to take on the role of the town crier in shouting out claims of racism.

As Freitas noted, Democrats unfairly make that charge, not only against their Republican opponents but against those who voted them into office as well.

Voters have had enough of this as they recognize that mounting an "ism" offensive is, in itself, offensive. It does nothing to focus on real issues to educate the public.

All in America is not well if such false claims continue to be heard from the charge of the "ism" brigade.

We're now 1 step closer to another 9/11

Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:59:40 GMT

WE'RE NOW ONE STEP CLOSER TO ANOTHER 9-11

James G. Zumwalt / February 11, 2022

World Net Daily ... In 2011, President Barack Obama identified in the National Strategy for Counterterrorism what his top priority as president was. That priority was stated to be the following...

..."The supreme responsibility of the president is to protect our system of government, not the safety of individuals or even their physical security."

Despite several presidents stating otherwise – i.e., that ensuring the safety and security of all Americans was their top priority – such language is not included within the president's oath of office. That oath clearly places top priority on preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States, as Obama's National Strategy for Counterterrorism dictated.

What is ironic is that Obama's former vice president and now our current president, Joe Biden, has embarked upon a policy that clearly underscores his contempt for a priority previous presidents embraced, whether it was right or wrong, as foremost among their duties of office. And a recent frightening discovery demonstrates just how far down Biden's list of priorities this duty has tumbled.

In fact, this discovery has outrageously opened the door to a possible repeat of the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

The first disaster of the Biden administration was its open border policy that has now reached the level of a quiet invasion. It is estimated 2 million illegal immigrants entered the U.S. since Biden took office.

And despite the absence of a strict vetting process of these illegals for criminal activity or testing for COVID-19, Biden even provides ground and air transportation to send them deeper into the heart of America. Additionally, as a result of his Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco, thousands of unvetted Afghan refugees have been dispersed around the country.

Because we have lost control of our southern border, the Mexican drug cartels have filled the void, making money by transporting illegals and drugs into the U.S.

They brazenly have resorted to using the roads construction crews had built while working on the border wall during Donald Trump's presidency. The influx of drugs into the U.S., and especially fentanyl, has drastically increased , along with the number of deaths caused by overdoses.

But, as if all this were not enough, indications are one of the strongest cartels – Jalisco New Generation cartel, known in Spanish by the acronym "CJNG" – is working closely with Middle East terrorist networks. Evidence of this affiliation has come to light due to new assault and guerrilla tactics, mirroring the murderous tactics of al-Qaida, the Taliban and other groups, being employed.

CJNG is now using new tools of the terrorist trade, such as explosive-laden drones and landmines, targeting both Mexican police and competing cartels. The state of Michoacan in Mexico has taken the brunt of CJNG's brutality. In 2021, it suffered more than 2,700 homicides and, less than two months into the new year, has logged another 200 more.

With CJNG developing a close relationship with Middle East terrorists, it is not much of a jump to recognize where such an affiliation will lead to next. Middle East terrorists now have a gateway into the U.S. to conduct a devastating attack against us whenever they seek to do so.

There are already several reasons why they undoubtedly are eagerly exploring the opportunity to make use of such a gateway, feeling a comfort level they have never felt before.

The Iranians still eagerly seek revenge against America for the January 2020 assassination of their terrorist leader, Gen. Qasem Soleimani, who commanded that country's elite Quds Force.

While America's closed borders posed a problem for them back then, they no longer do today.

In January, 2022, the Taliban were sufficiently emboldened by Biden's open borders policy, threatening to send 2,000 suicide bombers to Washington, D.C., should he send the same number of U.S. troops to our embassy in Kabul.

This month, the hideout of ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi in Syria was surrounded by U.S. forces, leading the terrorist mastermind to detonate an explosive device, killing himself and his family. Undoubtedly, that group will now seek their revenge by exploiting our open borders.

We are living at a time that numerous dark forces seek to inflict as much harm on America as possible. They will be relentless in their efforts to do so. Elements of those dark forces are already lurking within the U.S. But ignoring our borders at such a time in order to prevent other terrorist elements from entering is a presidential dereliction of duty.

Sadly, that revelation will not come to light until after we have suffered another 9/11 terrorist attack.

Super Bowl halftime show sends despicable anti-police message

Thu, 10 Feb 2022 00:45:45 GMT

SUPER BOWL HALFTIME SHOW SENDS DESPICABLE ANTI-POLICE MESSAGE

James G. Zumwalt / February 9, 2022

World Net Daily ... With crime statistics significantly rising across the nation and President Joe Biden finally acknowledging this increase is linked to the defund-the-police movement that sought to punish all officers for the sins of a few, the last thing this year's Super Bowl should be doing is hosting halftime entertainment that enforces a negative police message.

Over the past two years, groups like Black Lives Matter (BLM) have unfairly done tremendous damage to law enforcement's reputation.

They have obfuscated the reality that the vast majority of police courageously serve, risking their lives to protect and defend the public. While there may be a few who failed to honor their profession, we need to remember, just like all professions, they reflect a microcosm of society.

Thus, we are blessed with the good and cursed with the bad – the former, fortunately, far outnumbering the latter. Ironically, just like there are a few bad police officers, there are bad BLM members as well.

With millions of viewers watching Feb. 13's Super Bowl, it would be a great time for the National Football League to convey a positive message during the halftime show in support of law enforcement – a message reinforcing the positive contribution law enforcement continues to make despite the dark shadow BLM and others have undeservedly cast over all those who serve.

This dark shadow has had two devastating impacts.

First, crime statistics have skyrocketed across the nation, most notably in cities run by the Democrats who quickly enforced police-defunding efforts, giving criminals a new lease on life. Defunding and anti-police campaigns have resulted in numerous officers taking early retirement or quitting.

The shortage of law enforcement assets has caused many criminals to fearlessly ply their trade, especially knowing progressive prosecutors will refuse to prosecute many crimes. Additionally, new bail guidelines effectively implement a "catch and release" policy allowing those charged to walk after making nominal bail.

Such a policy has resulted in several criminals committing a second crime before they can even be tried for an earlier one. Law-abiding citizens are clearly put at senseless risk due to such campaigns taking their deadly toll.

Second, while police shootings trigger national attention, there is a story the media fail to cover because it is telling about the lawless state of our Union. Not since 1995 have so many police officers been killed in the line of duty in a year's time than the 73 who were killed during the first year of Joe Biden's presidency.

The damning negativity unfairly focused on all our police officers created an environment in which more law enforcement lives were lost last year than any year in the previous quarter century.

Sadly, several of these deaths were intentional as officers were lured into an ambush by shooters feeling emboldened, believing anti-police rhetoric justified their actions. Such ambush attacks on police have increased by 91%.

So, with this background, what does the NFL do? With the harsh realities of anti-police rhetoric starting to sink in with the public, it opts to convey a totally contrary message by whom it invites to entertain at halftime.

It could not have reinforced a more negative law enforcement message. Not only did it invite a performer whose previous criminal behavior earned him opportunities to see the inside of a jail cell but one who is infamous for writing gangsta rap songs with vile anti-police lyrics as well. He is just the kind of entertainer a sane parent would not let his kids see.

The halftime performer is Snoop Dogg, 50, who has been arrested at least 7 times for charges ranging from drug possession to murder. That does not include his being implicated in a rape case, being banned from entering Britain and a denial of entry into Australia.

But while he lacks the pedigree to be nominated as a goodwill ambassador for America, Snoop Dogg apparently is viewed by the NFL as being capable of drawing viewers from across the country, despite his history of anti-police songs.

For those unfamiliar with Snoop Dogg or his "work," the following lyrics from his song "Police " provide some insight:

All you niggas out there,

Take your guns that you using to shoot each other

And start shooting these b--ch-a--

mother-f--king police.

That'll impress a mother-f--king nigga like me.

Not satisfied to target the police alone, he also reserves lyrics for blacks cooperating with them to solve a crime, such as: " You call the f--king police like a b--ch nigga do."

We will never know how many police officers have been killed or wounded thanks to the influence by such outrageous lyrics.

Snoop Dogg has not limited the vulgarity of his songs just to attacking the police as he has also targeted women. This is why he should feel at home joined on the halftime stage by two other male rappers rapping similar misogynistic messages – Eminem ("Just Don't Give a F--k") and Kendrick ("Bi--ch, Don't Kill My Vibe") Lamar.

We could not ask for better examples of America's cultural decline than this line-up.

An anti-police mindset has become a fever caught by liberals of all ilks – politicians, actors and, sadly, some of those responsible for educating our children. The White House has given the nonprofit foundation of George Soros $164 million to help criminal migrants fight convictions.

Actress Susan Sarandon mocked the deaths of two young NYPD police officerswho were killed in the line of duty. But beyond that, a teacher ridicul eremovedstudent a student for wearing a pro-police face mask, making the student remove it.

Snoop Dogg said that his selection to perform at the Super Bowl in his home state of California is a " dream come true.

As he performs on the West Coast, the graves on the East Coast of those two NYPD officers killed answering a domestic violence call will still be warm.

We are only left to wonder if it was Snoop Dogg's anti-police rhetoric that contributed to putting them there.

Which nation will find our sunken aircraft in Asia?

Mon, 07 Feb 2022 04:48:01 GMT

WHICH NATION WILL FIND OUR SUNKEN AIRCRAFT IN ASIA?

James G. Zumwalt / February 4, 2022

World Net Daily ... An incident occurring Jan. 24 in the South China Sea will trigger all the intrigue of a novel mystery by the late sea explorer/author Clive Cusler.

A similar incident almost half a century earlier generated such intrigue – in an underwater race the U.S. won – only because it had an asset that, unfortunately, is unavailable today.

On Jan. 24, 2022, an F-35C aircraft, the most advanced fighter jet in the U.S. inventory, suffered a pilot error mishap while attempting to land onboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, just off the coast of the Philippines. USS Vinson was operating with other ships in an exercise directed at challenging Beijing's territorial water claims to most of the South China Sea.

Falling overboard, the F-35C sank, although the pilot ejected and was safely recovered. The plane's loss immediately becomes an opportunity for our enemies to score a big win if they can recover it before we do.

Granted, the U.S. has the benefit of knowing the exact point of impact where the aircraft went down, but water depth and varying current layers underwater impact where exactly on the ocean floor it came to rest.

For our enemies, the F-35C becomes a treasure chest lost at sea, which will now cause them to launch an all-out effort to locate and recover it. The U.S. must await arrival of search assets from halfway around the world, but, since the lost aircraft lies in China's backyard, it can get on site sooner, while denying it is doing so.

Undoubtedly, the Russians are positioning themselves to search as well. Based on a recently formed friendship with China, more due to U.S. animosity than ideology, the two may well be coordinating efforts to maximize usage of their combined search assets.

We can expect the deep waters of the South China Sea to experience rush hour traffic as numerous underwater vehicles of three nations attempt to locate the jet.

This situation is not dissimilar to one occurring in 1976. In that incident , the most advanced plane of that era was the F-14 fighter, lost over the side of the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy operating in the North Sea. It too triggered an international search effort. Of major concern to the U.S. was preventing recovery of the F-14's highly secret Phoenix missile system.

The F-14 was the only aircraft equipped with missiles capable of shooting down the Soviet MIG-25 at extremely high altitudes and was believed to be more sophisticated than the Soviet plane.

This competing search effort was with the Soviet Union. It was believed the Soviets knew fairly precisely where the plane went down. However, due to the 1,890-foot depth, the sinking aircraft's drift downward still required a major search effort.

We eventually were able to locate the F-14 because of a special 130-foot long asset we had developed seven years earlier.

Motivated by the 1963 unsuccessful search for the wreckage of the nuclear submarine USS Thresher, the father of the nuclear Navy, Adm. Hyman Rickover, saw the need for a minisub capable of spending much time underwater scouring the sea floor for whatever mission was given.

Having obtained funding for this secret project, in 1968 Rickover quietly commissioned the world's smallest nuclear submarine, NR1, which proved its worth searching for the F-14.

Only able to carry a 13-man crew, NR1 located the jet after initiating a circular search pattern. It also discovered the Americans had not made it there first. A broken cable, netting and sea floor tracks indicated an attempt had earlier been made by the Soviets to raise the plane from the depths, only to lose it while hauling it up.

U.S. news stories concerning our search effort continued reporting failure to find the plane, making mention of some ships involved in the operation but never mentioning NR1.

NR1 would go on to recover pieces of the Space Shuttle Challenger (1986), survey the wreckage of Titanic's sister ship HMS Britannic (1995), discover three ancient Roman shipwrecks in the Mediterranean Sea (late 1990s), investigate the wreckage of the Civil War-era ironclad USS Monitor and participate in numerous oceanographic research missions.

Unfortunately, it is of no use today as it was decommissioned in 2008, its steel hull recycled and its control room now sitting in the U.S. Naval Undersea Museum in Keyport, Washington.

There may be a bit of revenge for the Russians getting involved in the search. President Vladimir Putin, who has always bemoaned the collapse of the Soviet Union as the "greatest tragedy," remembers well one of the greatest CIA accomplishments.

Following the sinking in 1968 of the Soviet nuclear submarine K-129 in the Pacific Ocean, 1,600 miles off the coast of Hawaii, the agency initiated Project Azorian to recover it. An industrious project, it necessitated secret construction of a special vessel – the Glomar Explorer.

This delayed the recovery attempt for six years. It was one of the most complex, expensive ($4 billion in today's money) and secretive operations of the Cold War.

As the Soviets did not know where the K-129 sank, the U.S. had plenty of time to plan its recovery. It knew approximately where the sub was as we were monitoring special underwater listening devices known as SOSUS in 1968 and had heard an acoustic event (an explosion onboard K-129), allowing us to pinpoint the submarine's location to within five nautical miles.

After locating it in 1974, the CIA ship began pulling it up, only to experience a mechanical claw malfunction, resulting in only recovering about one-third of the submarine.

As for the F-35C, a defense consultant emphasized the vital importance of its recovery, noting it "is basically like a flying computer. It's designed to link up other assets – what the Air Force calls 'linking sensors to shooters.' … If they (the Chinese military) can get into the 35's networking capabilities, it effectively undermines the whole carrier philosophy."

Let us hope the race to find the F-35C jet has a similar fate as do Cusler's novels where the good guys win.

Biden's foreign policy of abandonment: Afghanistan, now Ukraine

Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:52:55 GMT

BIDEN'S FOREIGN POLICY OF ABANDONMENT: FIRST AFGHANISTAN...NOW UKRAINE

James G. Zumwalt / February 2, 2022

World Net Daily ... On the evening of Aug. 3, 1991, the cruise ship Oceanos , with 571 passengers onboard, most of whom were South Africans, struck a reef. The vessel slowed and began taking on water about a mile from South Africa's Indian Ocean coast.

What happened during the next 12 hours before the ship sank the following day is one of the most irresponsible actions by a captain and his crew in maritime history, violating their duty to ensure the safety of their passengers – they immediately abandoned ship, leaving the passengers to save themselves.

By a stroke of massive good fortune, a group of the ship's entertainers took control and organized the evacuation of the ship before it sank. As a result - and quite miraculously - all survived.

As one passenger later told the media, "It was disgusting. The captain, safety officer and other senior crew got off as quickly as they could, so there was nobody to show us what to do during the rescue."

Later that evening, during an interview, the Greek captain incredulously attempted to defend his actions claiming, "When I order 'abandon ship,' it doesn't matter what time I leave. Abandon is for everybody. If some people like to stay, they can stay." He went on to suggest his early departure was so that he could supervise operations from shore.

Obviously, abandonment by others to whom we have entrusted our fate, especially in times of imminent danger, can leave us with a gut-wrenching sense of hopelessness and despair. Oceanos passengers were fortunate the leadership void left by their ship's captain was quickly filled to effect a safe rescue.

However, in the face of President Joe Biden's order to abandon the U.S. Embassy in the Ukraine, we are now seeing, for the second time in less than a year, his pursuit of a foreign policy of abandonment when it comes to the fate of our friends and allies.

Having abandoned our Afghan allies last year in a chaotic withdrawal done completely ass-backwards – extracting U.S. military personnel before all American and non-American civilians could be evacuated – Biden has now undertaken another abandonment approach in Ukraine as it awaits a possible invasion by the Russian bear

Biden has ordered the voluntary departure of the families of U.S. State Department personnel assigned to our embassy in Kyiv due to an "imminent" invasion. President Volodymyr Zelensky called the order "utterly ridiculous" and another example of "U.S. inconsistency." Biden's action undoubtedly has instilled that sense of hopelessness and despair among Ukrainians whose fate now remains uncertain.

While Biden has threatened severe repercussions in the form of economic sanctions and the repositioning of NATO forces should Moscow invade, it is doubtful the threat is sending chills down Russian President Vladimir Putin's spine.

When the U.S. implemented sanctions against Russia in 2014 after its incursions into Crimea and eastern Ukraine, Moscow turned its attention to insulating its economy against future sanctions.

This policy, dubbed "Fortress Russia," is being analyzed for ways to bypass it.

But even Biden's recent announcement he has put 8,500 U.S. military forces on alert as he consults with our European friends and will augment NATO with troops is most likely seen by Putin as showmanship. Taunting Ukraine, a Russian oligarch is boasting it will only take Russia 48 hours to conquer the country.

If Putin does invade, a growing consensus is it will begin with a massive and lethal cyberattack against the U.S. to distract it.

Meanwhile, the U.N. Security Council voted 10-2 (Russia and China voting no) to hold an emergency meeting at the request of the U.S. At that Jan. 31 meeting, the Russians absurdly accused the U.S. of bringing "nationalists, radicals, Russophobes and pure Nazis" to power in Ukraine as the U.S. accused Russia of baselssly blaming the West to "fabricate a pretext for attack."

It is interesting to see how "tough guy" Biden is using our military. This is the same Biden who refused to serve in the military in his younger years, obtaining five deferments during the Vietnam War, all while playing sports without any issues.

Unwilling to be a tough guy back then, Biden seeks to play one now by placing our military in harm's way.

Ironically, Biden may soon experience some abandonment karma himself as DNC Chairman Jaime Harrison may depart before the 2022 midterm elections to avoid getting blamed for the expected disastrous results for Democrats.

For all intents and purposes, Putin determined the cut of Biden's jib by his disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. He therefore knows the American president is a man he can manipulate. Even a recent U.S. poll bears this out reflecting that while a 60% majority believe Biden to be a nice guy, only 37% see him as a strong leader.

The adage "nice guys finish last" is exactly where Putin perceives Biden will end up in their contest of wills over Ukraine.

In preparation for this, Putin has already inserted special forces there who await their leader's signal to possibly trigger a false flag attack justifying a Russian invasion.

Unfortunately, there is another adage Biden supporters are recognizing all too late, "You reap what you sow." Having voted for incompetence, they will soon see what their actions have wrought.

We can only pray that our American ship of state, headed directly for yet another foreign policy iceberg marked "abandonment," does not suffer the fate of Oceanos.

The hidden value of Islam's 'gift cards'

Sat, 29 Jan 2022 04:41:10 GMT

THE HIDDEN VALUE OF ISLAM'S "GIFT CARDS"

James G. Zumwalt / January 28, 2022

World Net Daily ... Retailers love gift cards. Why? Because they bring in immediate cash without an immediate need to provide a product, with approximately 51% going unused .

Similarly, Islam issues gift cards to believers, containing a hidden redeemable value to use, or not, as they choose.

Just like retailer gift cards have a maximum redeemable monetary value, so too does the Quran issue a maximum redeemable gift card value to believers. Theirs, however, are not issued in monetary terms but in terms of non-believers' lives for those Muslims seeking to meet their religious obligations.

To better understand this, one first must understand what the Quran and its teachings tell us. This is especially important now due to U.S. House passage on Dec. 14 of H.R. 5665 , known as the "Combating International Islamophobia Act."

Introduced by anti-Semite Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., the bill passed, without a single Republican vote, perhaps because they understand Islam's redeemable gift card value.

A millennium ago, Muslims were confused by the Quran's teachings as some earlier verses that encouraged harmony with non-believers were contradicted by later verses, promoting violence toward them.

Seeking to dispel this confusion, in the 10th century, Islamic scholars adopted the concept of " abrogation ," meaning wherever an earlier verse conflicted with a later one, the latter invalidated the former.

Such confusion was surprising. After all, the Quran was allegedly dictated by Allah to the Prophet Muhammad through the Archangel Gabriel, and, as Islam promotes , Allah is supposedly a perfect god. Arguably, a perfect god would not have created an imperfect holy book, miring it with such confusion.

The real reason for the confusion was not an imperfect god but an imperfect scammer.

The earlier, tolerant verses toward non-believers provided by Muhammad resulted from his seeking acceptance of Islam by the masses, taking a softer approach to do so.

Only later, as Muslim armies forced Islam upon the masses did later verses take an intolerant approach.

But abrogation paved the way for Islam to promote several beliefs: No god existed but Allah; Islam was to rule the world; and all other religions were to be subservient to it. These teachings were memorialized after Muhammad's death by a seventh century caliph named "Umar" (or "Omar").

Having conquered Christians in Syria, Omar entered into a pact giving them three options under Islamic rule...

...(1) Convert to Islam...

...(2) Remain Christian but pay tribute, accepting a humiliating lesser status...

...(3) Die by the sword.

Even to this day, Westerners remain highly ignorant about these "Conditions of Omar" – now part of Shariah law. As the terrorist group ISIS cut its swath across the Middle East during President Barack Obama's tenure, it sought to impose these conditions upon all non-Muslims, including moderate Muslims, mostly using the third option. And, although ISIS is an extremist practitioner of Islam, the foremost Sunni Islamic educational

institution in the world today – Al Azhar University in Egypt, from which one might expect a moderate interpretation – embraced the Conditions in 1991.

Islam's worldview is simple. It divides the world into two parts – Dar al-Islam (House of Islam) and Dar al-harb (House of War).

The first division refers to all territories under Islamic rule and, therefore, existing in a state of peace, with the second division referencing all territories not yet under Islamic rule which, therefore, exist in a state of war with Islam.

The belief Islam is superior to all other religions, which therefore must submit to it, was naively recognized by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in 2019 with Rep. Omar's entry into the House.

For 181 years, the House enforced a rule no members were to wear head coverings of the floor. Pelosi lifted the ban to accommodate Omar. While Pelosi's intent might have been cultural inclusiveness, Muslims like Omar viewed it as submission to Islam.

From this initial door opening for Islamic influence, Omar has mounted her anti-America campaign, most recently reflected by introducing H.R. 5665. She and her progressive Squad members use their congressional podium to push their pro-Muslim/anti-U.S./anti-Semitic rhetoric.

While non-Muslims may take comfort believing most Muslims are moderates and, therefore, will not redeem the card's full value, we need to remember the words of Turkey President Tayyip Erdogan.

He adamantly disagrees with this, noting in 2017, "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that's it.'" He suggested the only reason non-believers push a moderate Islam version is to weaken the religion.

As the House considered passage of H.R. 5665 above, Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., read into the record President Joe Biden's statement , signifying "our country's commitment to defending freedom of religion," reinforcing our belief "that people of all faiths and backgrounds should be treated with equal dignity and respect around the world."

While claiming a rise of anti-Muslim bigotry in America, Biden remained silent about Islam's issuance of a death warrant against all other religions.

As our legislators rush to demonstrate equality for all religions, they ignore the violence Islam alone calls for toward other religions. This unfortunate truth was also ignored by a Florida school board that recently declared Eid al-Fitr an official school holiday to placate Muslims objecting to the recognition of Jewish and Christian holidays but not theirs.

An Islamic gift card effectively becomes a loaded gun for believers to carry with them, to use, or not, as they see fit; however, lest non-believers be labeled Islamophobic, they dare not challenge disarming them.

And, as Masih Alinejad, an Iranian-American journalist and female-rights activist, points out, a major flaw of H.R. 5665 is its failure to provide a clear definition of Islamophobia, leaving human rights critics of Shariah law inequalities susceptible to such claims.

Since 2020, Nigeria's Muslim terrorist group Boko Haram has executed 3,530 Christians – more than any other nation – believing, "Allah will reward them."

Despite this violent, anti-Christian mindset, evident during the tenure of President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well, no effort was made to include Nigeria on the list of Countries of Particular Concern for tolerating violations of religious freedom until President Donald Trump did so.

Last year, apparently more concerned about reversing Trump policies than about Christian genocide, Biden astonishingly removed Nigeria from that list.

The Nazi blueprint for the fate of Jews in World War II was laid out in "Mein Kampf ." But Western civilization refused to believe Adolf Hitler really wanted Jews dead.

Jewish Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel later noted , "When someone says they want to kill you, believe them." Seven decades after the Holocaust, we ignore Wiesel's counsel by refusing to believe what the Conditions of Omar tell us about our own fate.

It is unwise to do so considering, of 195 nations of the world, Islam plays a significant role in 56 of them .

oday, non-Muslims must never forget that Muslims with whom they interact may, at any time, choose to fully redeem their gift cards. H.R. 5665 will have us believe it is Islamophobic to express concerns about such a card – but it is not. It is simply a sad reality of life triggered by Islam's founding.

Does China want Taiwan's 'pot of gold' enough to invade?

Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:29:42 GMT

DOES CHINA WANT TAIWAN'S "POT OF GOLD" ENOUGH TO INVADE?

James G. Zumwalt / January 26, 2022

World Net Daily ... The U.S. Army War College journal, Parameter, recently published an article proposing an interesting strategy for Taiwan should it be invaded by China. While the strategy offers nothing militarily to defend the island against invasion, it argues it might give China pause to reconsider such aggression based on a suggested consequence by Taiwan of doing so.

While China's military superiority clearly enables it to steamroll its way across Taiwan to achieve victory, this strategy suggests Taiwan can make it a Pyrrhic one for Beijing.

"Pyrrhic" is a word deriving its meaning from a battle won by King Pyrrhus in early Greek history. While successfully defeating the Romans at the Battle of Asculum in 279 B.C., he lost so many men that he was unable to defeat Rome itself. Today, Pyrrhic defines a victory won but at tremendous cost to the victor. It is arguably the only strategy a brutal Chinese government might understand.

This is because the proposed strategy would trigger a devastating setback on China's economic rationale for invasion – one powered by Beijing's expansionist mindset of both an aggressive and non-aggressive nature–the former targeting Taiwan and the latter evidenced by its successful "Belt & Road Initiative ."

This strategy links Taiwan's greatest economic high-tech asset with China's greatest economic high-tech deficiency: semiconductor manufacturing.

The global demand for semiconductors is tremendous. The breakdown of the world's top 10 largest manufacturing companies shows six are American, two are South Korean, one is Japanese and one is Taiwanese. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (TSMC), boasting the world's largest dedicated independent semiconductor foundry, is ranked fourth-largest.

So demanding is the market, nations recognize the danger of relying on foreign manufacturers, prompting U.S. high-tech giant Intel to announce it will establish , at the cost of $20 billion, "the largest silicon manufacturing location on the planet" in Ohio. Florida too is seeking to establish itself as a semiconductor manufacturing Mecca.

Semiconductors are basically Taiwan's high-tech "pot of gold" equivalent as the country's largest (33%) export. While mainland China has over 40 semiconductor manufacturing companies, none ranks among the world's 10 largest. Its semiconductor demand, therefore, far exceeds its production, with Chinese manufacturers only able to meet 30% of the country's requirements

Meanwhile, China accounts for 60% of the world's consumption.

Largely due to semiconductor manufacturing, Taiwan's economy grew by 2.98% in 2020, outpacing China's growth at 2.3%. The last time the former's economy grew faster than the latter's was in 1990. The semiconductor industry has also helped Taiwan offset economic drags caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Beyond the political reason of China claiming Taiwan as a province, Beijing undoubtedly sees invasion as an opportunity to help fulfill its semiconductor demand by capturing Taiwan's semiconductor manufacturing capability.

Thus, the proposed strategy calls for Taiwan, in the face of a Chinese invasion, to immediately engage in a scorched-earth policy, destroying its own semiconductor industry.

However, China expert Gordon Chang disagrees this strategy will in any way deter China from invading the island.

He argues that C hina has long coveted Taiwan's return as a province under its own umbrella and is motivated strategically to see it happen. Just like China has done with Hong Kong, Beijing knows its survival depends on reeling in the individual rights and freedoms of the Taiwanese to ensure all control flows from Beijing.

Chang agrees with International Assessment and Strategy Center China military analyst Richard Fisher that, in any military confrontation, the U.S. could defeat China. Fisher says America must understand that, "Destroying Taiwan's democracy is essential to giving China's Communist Party license to destroy all other democracies."

Concerning Taiwan, China's President Xi Jinping is on a roll and knows his timing could not be better.

Despite sufficient evidence indicating the coronavirus was unleashed upon the world from China's Wuhan Laboratory, deflating the economies of numerous countries, Beijing's was the only major world economy to grow in 2020.

Xi has contempt for America's weak leadership under President Joe Biden who is clay in the Chinese president's hands, evidenced by Biden's failure to even raise the coronavirus source issue with China. Xi also sees America's political infighting and divisiveness as weakening its ability to respond to an invasion of Taiwan.

Never before has a perfect storm of conditions been so ripe for China to reclaim Taiwan. Meanwhile, China is stockpiling strategic commodities as if it is going to war – ironically, with the U.S. as one of its largest suppliers.

Another factor possibly prompting Xi to invade Taiwan is timing it with a Russian invasion of Ukraine. A discombobulated Biden has already demonstrated, when it comes to foreign policy challenges, he is fully incapable of dealing with just one ball in the air, so two would be impossible.

And, with China and Russia now working together as seen by their recent joint military training drill , the two countries would undoubtedly coordinate their invasions to split U.S. military assets in the unlikely event of an American military respons

As the Russians continue moving troops westward and are in a position to invade at any time, some experts believe an invasion is "very likely." What happens in Ukraine will not stay there as other aggressive states will seek to act while the iron is hot.

Another possible card to be played is Iran.

U.S. sanctions against it have resulted in Tehran and Moscow becoming trading partners. They are also military allies in Syria and Iraq. Additionally, seeking to offset the impact of U.S. sanctions, Iran has recently developed closer ties with China.

The mullahs could coordinate their own hostile actions to coincide with those of Russia and/or China, creating additional problems for the U.S. in the Middle East.

The opening line of the 1859 Charles Dickens' novel "A Tale of Two Cities" fits the foreign policy decision-making environment in a chaotic world today: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times …"

For autocratic world community members with designs on expansion, it is clearly the best of times; for democratic global community members hoping for American protection against them, it is the worst.

What Biden has NOT learned about hostile invasions

Sat, 22 Jan 2022 01:14:14 GMT

WHAT BIDEN HAS NOT LEARNED ABOUT HOSTILE INVASIONS

James G. Zumwalt / January 21, 2022

World Net Daily ... On Jan. 19, as President Joe Biden held what was only his second solo press conference since occupying the Oval Office, calling mostly on members of the media who would toss him softball questions, it was hoped he would not embarrass himself or endanger the country by making an ill-advised comment.

Alas, that was far too much to ask since the event lasted nearly two hours.

The inevitable ill-advised comment came in a moment that may never be forgotten, occurring as the conversation turned to a possible invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

What Biden said at this point brought back memories of what happened 32 years earlier when an American diplomat failed to provide absolute clarity in a discussion with a world leader feeling out U.S. intentions as he contemplated invading a neighbor.

It was July 25, 1990, when the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, was summoned by President Saddam Hussein to his office. There were indications Iraq was contemplating an invasion of Kuwait with which a border conflict existed. While the discussion covered a number of topics, it eventually touched on Kuwait.

Purportedly, the message conveyed to Hussein by Glaspie about its border dispute was that, "[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait." She also had earlier informed the Iraqi president that the U.S. State Department had "no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait."

While the above exchange may not have been intended by Glaspie as such, it effectively gave Iraq the green light to invade. It was a classic example of one side failing to clearly state its position on an issue and the other side hearing what it wanted to hear. This would be the last high-level contact between the two countries as a week later, Hussein invaded Kuwait.

Glaspie failed to learn from an oversight made by another high-level U.S. official in history that may well have precipitated war.

In January 1950, Secretary of State Dean Acheson gave a speech discussing the U.S. defense perimeter in Asia, which he explained extended from Japan's Ryukyu Islands to the Philippines, leaving out South Korea.

We now know from secret documents acquired after the Soviet Union's collapse that Josef Stalin viewed this as a green light the U.S. would not defend against an invasion into South Korea. Six months later, the North did just that.

During his recent press conference, when the subject of a Russian invasion of Ukraine arose, Biden stated , knowing that the eyes and ears of President Vladimir Putin were upon him...

..."I think what you're going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It's one thing if it's a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera."

Ironically, Biden's message to Putin had a bit more clarity than did Glaspie's message to Hussein.

Glaspie had fuzzed up the U.S. position, suggesting Washington might not intervene in an Iraq invasion into Kuwait as the matter was purely an Arab-on-Arab issue and the U.S. had no defense agreement with Kuwait. Biden, on the other hand, drew a line in the sand over which Putin could step – i.e., that of allowing "a minor incursion " into Ukraine.

Not only did this give Putin a green light, it ignored the fact that the vehicle Putin has driven in the past to impose his will upon neighbors has been one of minor incursions. This was done in both the 2008 invasion of Georgia and the 2014 invasion of Crimea.

Biden's comments also suggested there was some division among our European NATO partners on a unified response to any Russian aggression. This is true as Germany has stupidly blocked delivery of defensive weaponry, such as anti-drone jamming guns already paid for by Ukraine, fearing it might provoke military escalation.

Biden's press conference comments triggered an immediate response.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tweeted , "We want to remind the great powers that there are no minor incursions … Just as there are no minor casualties and little grief from the loss of loved ones."

This caused the White House to activate the overworked Biden gaffe team. The new message was Biden did not mean to suggest a smaller-scale Russian military incursion would meet with a weaker U.S. response, nor was he suggesting NATO disunity.

Press Secretary Jen Psaki tried to put some punch behind Biden's gaffe, saying, "If any Russian military forces move across the Ukrainian border, that's a renewed invasion, and it will be met with a swift, severe, and united response from the United States and our allies." Obviously unimpressed with Psaki's punch, Putin continues prepping his forces.

Zelensky's concerns are warranted. In previous incursions, professional soldiers in Russian-style combat uniforms, sans identifying insignia but armed with Russian weapons, began appearing, manning roadblocks and seizing strategic points in neighboring territories.

They were dubbed by the Ukrainians as "little green men." Putin denied they were Russians, although he later congratulated his officers on their Crimean operation, acknowledging their true identity two months later.

Ukraine has seen these little green men land again, possibly preparing to conduct a false flag operation as an excuse to invade the country. Putin obviously denies this.

While Biden has yet to suggest a Russian invasion would meet with an "in kind" response from the U.S., he has attempted to instill the fear of God in Putin by threatening severe "high impact" U.S. sanctions against Russia.

However, there is little a weak U.S. president – not only perceived as such by our enemies but also by nearly 4 in 10 Americans – can effectively do to pressure an autocratic ruler to play nice.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., perhaps playing off the little green men theme, made the observation, if aliens landed in America and requested to be taken to our leader, it would be "embarrassing" to have to take them to an incompetent Biden.

Undoubtedly, those aliens would wonder how, in a society of 330 million people, Biden is the best we could come up with, especially as he even has trouble remembering whether it is he or Kamala Harris who is president.

Even more worrisome, based on the ill-advised message Biden has sent Putin opening the door for an invasion of the Ukraine, is what the unbridled leader of the Free World might utter to antagonize alien visitors, possibly triggering a war of the worlds as a result.

'Domestic terrorism' lies in the eye of the beholder

Thu, 20 Jan 2022 01:08:26 GMT

"DOMESTIC TERRORISM" LIES IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

James G. Zumwalt / January 19, 2022

World Net Daily ... Three recent developments across the nation clearly underscore a threat reality the administration of President Joe Biden seeks to ignore as it, unsurprisingly, prefers to promote political propaganda over truth.

The first development ended late the evening of Saturday, Jan. 15, in Texas after Muslim terrorist/British citizen Malik Faisal Akram , 44, took four hostages at the Colleyville synagogue earlier that day in a 10-hour standoff with police.

Akram had said over the phone to someone on the other end, "There are hostages in the synagogue who are going to die. … What are you crying for?" That comment may well have sealed Akram's fate by making his intentions known about his victims' fate, triggering a hostage rescue team (HRT) into action.

Meanwhile, neither the White House nor the FBI acknowledged Islam's history of anti-Semitism as reason for targeting Jews for whom it seeks global annihilation .

The event had a happy ending as police confirmed the outcome, "the HRT … breached the synagogue, they rescued the … hostages, the suspect is deceased."

Akram's immediate objective was to seek the release of Aafia Siddiqui, known as "Lady al-Qaida" and once on the FBI's most-wanted list. She was convicted in 2010 of attempting to kill Americans in Afghanistan. Educated in the U.S. as a neuroscientist, including at MIT, all that went for naught as she was sentenced to 86 years in prison, serving it out in a U.S. Air Force prison near Fort Worth, Texas.

Jewish lives were an expendable price Akram was willing to pay to achieve this objective, although Biden, unwilling to acknowledge the motivational role of radical Islam, talked about guns.

Adding to the effort not to blame Islam even after Akram's objective was disclosed was Michigan's Democratic Attorney General Dana Nessel who ridiculously expressed her grave concern – lacking any evidence – that the motivation may have been white supremacy.

Further investigation has now determined the incident was an international terrorist conspiracy.

The second development involved the National School Board Association (NSBA).

As is now known, the NSBA had quietly worked behind the scenes with President Joe Biden's secretary of education, Miguel Cardona, to write a letter to the secretary suggesting parents criticizing school agendas posed a terrorism danger. These agendas included the teaching of the anti-white curriculum known as Critical Race Theory (CRT) as well as COVID-19 protection policies.

Cardona's covert participation is now being investigated by the Senate.

Rather than accepting a parent's right to question what their child is taught and how health concerns are addressed, the NSBA wrote, "… these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes."

Upon receipt, Cardona then sent the letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ), which directed the FBI to assist local law enforcement in using federal laws to crack down on parent protests. The letter's intent, obviously, was to create a chilling effect upon parents unhappy about school curriculum.

Once the NSBA/Cardona/FBI collusion was brought to light following a Freedom of Information request , the Washington Post noted the devastating financial impact the letter was having on the NSBA having shot itself in the foot. NSBA's clandestine effort to label concerned parents as domestic terrorists had now put the organization "at risk of total collapse."

The Post explained ...

..."Nineteen mostly GOP-led states have withdrawn from the association or promised to when this year's membership expires, and six members of what was a 19-person board have left. Several states are discussing forming an alternative association for school boards...

...A new executive director of the National School Boards Association (NSBA) is working to save the organization, lobbying individual states to reconsider, but so far he has not persuaded any of them to change their minds."

The third development involved the DOJ's announcement that it was forming a special terrorism unit prioritizing domestic over foreign activity – i.e., "extremist anti-government and anti-authority" terrorist activity.

Was this unit being formed due to the organized and mostly violent protests of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa? Was this unit being formed due to the terrorist activities of lone wolf Islamists? Was this being formed to address a recent Taliban threat to send thousands of suicide bombers into America or Iran's threats against U.S. government officials? No

The unit's creation was purely political, evidenced by the title given the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing announcing its establishment – "The Domestic Terrorism Threat One Year After January 6."

Republicans at the hearing were quick to note the "wildly disparate standards" DOJ used in pursuing participants in the 2020 multi-month BLM/Antifa-organized riots and the Jan. 6 event. Comparatively, while DOJ has arrested and charged 725 people in connection with the latter four-hour riot, only 250 people were arrested in connection with the former riots, which went on for a year.

The three developments above underscore some realities...

When Muslim terrorists act against American Jews, it is not a gun control issue but rather one of Jews being radical Islam's historic target of choice...

...parents expressing concern about liberal school agendas are not domestic terrorists; and establishing a special FBI unit to investigate disgruntled parents unhappy with liberal school agendas for their children misdirects the focus of domestic terrorism from an existing threat to a non-existent one.

It is irresponsible to do what Nessel did above concerning the first reality, attempting to obfuscate truth by raising a false white supremacist motivation. The FBI has now issued a warning to faith-based communities they will undoubtedly remain the targets of domestic Muslim terrorist violence.

It appears what constitutes domestic terrorism lies in the eyes of the beholder.

In 1801, the Battle of Copenhagen pitted the English and Danish fleets against each other. Early in the battle, the British commander, believing he was losing, raised a signal flag for his subordinates to "break off action." But one of his subordinates, Vice Adm. Horatio Nelson, felt victory was attainable.

When the flag to retreat was pointed out to him, a defiant Nelson – who was blind in one eye–put his telescope up to that eye, claiming he saw nothing, continuing to fight.

Sadly, liberal Democrats today pull a "Nelson," placing a telescope to a closed eye when it comes to recognizing domestic terrorism.

For Nelson, a blind eye brought him victory; for Democrats, a closed eye will bring them defeat.

The toxic waste of race hustlers Joy Reid & Don Lemon

Thu, 13 Jan 2022 01:29:57 GMT

THE TOXIC WASTE OF RACE HUSTLERS JOY REID AND DON LEMON

James G. Zumwalt / January 12, 2022

World Net Daily ... Before fake news became a pandemic of mainstream media, the disease was fairly isolated to the National Inquirer – a newspaper noted for luring readers with outrageous headlines and fake news. But, unlike today's media, the Inquirer at least made its fake news obvious with headlines such as, "Severed Leg Hops to Hospital" and "Titanic Survivors Found Onboard."

While the line between fake news and truth today is indiscernible to the public, some members of the television media are infamous for clouding that line with the toxic waste of racial hatred, unconcerned about its impact.

Foremost among these media malcontents are a despicable duo of television hosts, MSNBC's Joy Reid and CNN's Don Lemon

They are black race hustlers who, on numerous occasions, take racially inconsequential news stories and pervert them into ones of racial consequence.

Recently, Reid lashed out at Tesla founder Elon Musk after he used the term "Karen." It all started due to Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeting, "Let's change the rigged tax code so [Musk] will actually pay taxes and stop freeloading off everyone else.

In his response, Musk addressed Warren as "Senator Karen " and noted he'll pay more taxes for 2021 than any American in history.

For those unfamiliar with the term, "Karen" is pejorative slang for "an obnoxious, angry, entitled, and often racist middle-aged white woman who uses her privilege to get her way or police other people's behavior

How then does a reference by a white man, applying a term about a white woman, targeting another white woman qualify as racist?

Reid reached down deep into her bag of racist spins to plant the pearl of an idea Musk was racist for daring to use the term Karen. Rationalizing that the term is a black-community creation, Reid argued its use was for that community alone, thus charging Musk with "misappropriating black vernacular."

Apparently, Reid fails to see the irony of hosting her program, "The Reid Out," on television – the invention of a white man's work product, which, according to her logic, suggests usage be limited to the white community alone.

Reid undoubtedly enjoys the benefits of numerous other inventions produced by white minds, which she should also avoid using lest she too be guilty of such misappropriation. However, as a society, we do not work the one-way/Reid way; whether a product invention or word creation, usage is not limited to the community of the originator's race but for common usage by all.

Another race-baiting comment Reid previously offered up that would challenge the Inquirer for most outrageous made, while offering no supporting evidence, is the allegation red states keep black people alive for the sole reason of cooking white people's stea

Who knows, perhaps this explains the recent guidance issued by President Joe Biden giving blacks a racial priority in the administration of COVID drugs.

Conservatives are often targeted by Reid's fake-news attacks. She falsely alleged Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was involved in a sex-trafficking ring. In an absurd attack against Fox News, she claimed , as the most vaccinated company in America, it was telling vaccine lies and thus seeking to "let their viewers and their fans die," causing a viewer to query whether she was on "crazy pills."

Reid's claims have been so outrageous, even other liberals have reminded her that truth matters.

After the alleged attack on Jussie Smollett by Donald Trump supporters, Reid was among the first to jump onboard the condemnation bandwagon. She immediately tweeted , "Nooses never really disappeared as messages of a very specific kind of terror, but every time they're used, my god, it's chilling. …" Obviously, after the attack was proven a hoax, she said nothing.

This is unsurprising as Reid herself was guilty of a similar hate crime allegation hoax . Not until after she started hosting her show was it discovered Reid had written a number of hateful blogs toward gays years earlier. She disavowed doing so, claiming she was a hate-crime victim of hackers, never providing proof as forensic specialists found none.

Apparently rooting from the same anti-white ideological tree as Reid is Don Lemon.

A liberal narcissistic news superstar, Lemon claims, "Everything I say, every single night, is based in fact." His "right" opinions are outrageously slanted to the left. In explaining himself further, Lemon sounds more like a top graduate of the Joe Biden school of communications, claiming , "I'm not an opinion host. I give my point of view."

Nothing is more revealing about Lemon's holier-than-thou attitude toward racism than an October 2018 rant he delivered.

After acknowledging no one should be demonized due to race, he says we need to "realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right." So much for his assertion "everything I say … is based in fact." How Lemon determined this supposedly factual nugget remains a mystery.

Consuming alcohol has a tendency to loosen lips – as a tipsy Lemon revealed on New Year's Eve.

Lemon claimed he labels his critics as racist as they see him as a uniquely successful black man, apparently dismissing every other successful black man who has lived.

But Lemon currently stands on thin ice concerning his CNN employment. He is accused of the same actions that got his ideological white brother Chris Cuomo terminated.

Just like Cuomo discredited himself by acting to undermine sexual harassment claims against his brother – New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo – it has been learned Lemon tipped off Smollett, advising him police believed his allegations were a hoax, leading to Smollett's refusal to turn his phone over to them.

CNN Cuomo was also hit with sexual harassment claims and now we know, so has Lemon . Firing Cuomo without squeezing Lemon out leaves CNN in a difficult situation – a network experiencing karma, after having little regard for truth, now getting hit with it.

Whether due to poor ratings, a lack of integrity or acts of sexual harassment, liberal commentators may be dropping like flies this year. Last year it Chris Cuomo; Reid is now on the chopping block to lose her show; and Lemon may well suffer termination as sexual-harassment accountability draws closer.

We can only hope that the eviction of these three will rid America of a great stench emanating from the fake-news racist cesspool.

I-95 fiasco raises issue of survivability of electric cars

Sat, 08 Jan 2022 16:15:15 GMT

I-95 FIASCO RAISES ISSUE OF SURVIVABILITY OF ELECTRIC CARS

James G. Zumwalt / January 7, 2022

World Net Daily ... Sometimes we are left to wonder whether unseen forces may be at work trying to get us to rethink whether certain planned initiatives are smart to undertake, at least without giving the dire consequences of doing so additional thought.

Thousands of unhappy drivers were given such an opportunity – including at least one member of Congress – on Jan. 3. Commuting into Washington, D.C., they got caught up in a 24-hour-plus delay on Interstate 95 leading into the city.

It happened after six tractor-trailers crashed in Virginia in a heavy snowstorm, which left them stranded. Many motorists ran car heaters to stay warm, were without food and hampered by vehicles abandoned on the roadway. They were left to await the clearing of numerous road bottlenecks before being able to proceed, assuming they still had enough fuel to get to a gas station.

Fortunately, there were no injuries or deaths caused by the delay.

Due to numerous cars that did run out of gas, fuel had to be transported to them or else they had to be towed to a fuel source.

This incident comes at a critical time. President Joe Biden has put us on a course to increase electric vehicle (EV) manufacturing while reducing manufacturing for internal combustion engine (ICE) cars.

Supported by the United Auto Workers (UAW) union, Biden announced a combined target of 50% EVs, including plug-in hybrids and fuel cell models, by 2030. All government vehicles are to be EVs by 2050. While Tesla, having produced its first EV in 2008, has built more EVs in the U.S. than any other automaker, it has done so without UAW labor.

he major car manufacturers are already onboard.

Chrysler announced that by 2028, it plans to go completely electric. It seeks to embed in its vehicles an artificial intelligence (AI) software system powered by a battery capable of traveling 350 to 400 miles per charge.

Interestingly, as other automakers such as Volkswagen, Toyota, General Motors, Ford, BMW and Nissan also announce transitioning to EV manufacturing, a newcomer – never before in the car manufacturing industry – announced its entry into the market. The company that brought us PlayStations – Sony – is now cutting its teeth on EVs, hoping eventually to bring autonomous vehicles to the market.

It will do this by creating a new division focusing on vehicle development known as Sony Mobility Inc. It has already built a prototype seven-seat, sport-utility EV with all-wheel drive.

But while the leading car manufacturers, and now Sony, announce their run for the roses in the EV race, a question must be asked based on the recent I-95 snow delay. That question is how well would EVs have performed during a 24-hour-plus delay in keeping drivers and passengers warm and able, once road bottlenecks were cleared, to get moving again?

While a century ago we proved able to quickly transition from the horse to mass-produced cars, the transition from ICE cars to EVs will not go as smoothly. Nor will it go without devastating consequences absent such consideration.

One of the automakers that has established itself as a leader in the market, having grown its footprint the old fashioned way by building reliable cars without resorting to acquisitions to expand, is Toyota.

Before the Jan. 3 storm, and despite its heading in the EV direction as well, it went on record before the U.S. Senate stating its concerns that the world is not yet ready to support a fully electric auto fleet.

In March 2019, Robert Wimmer, head of Toyota’s energy and environmental research, gave testimony which, had it been played for EV drivers stranded on I-95, would have had them nodding in full agreement.

Despite auto manufacturers' ambitious goals, Wimmer noted just 2% of the world’s cars are EVs amid a slew of pro-ICE factors, such as price, range and infrastructure. Cheaper ICE pricing exists even after EV tax subsidies are factored in.

Additionally, Wimmer reported how the scale involved in switching to EVs has yet to be seriously discussed in any systematic way. With 290 million cars on U.S. roads in 2021, of which 98% are gas-powered, installation of a massive EV infrastructure system is necessary.

A U.S. government study determined at least 8,500 strategically placed charge stations would be needed just to support a fleet of 7 million EVs – six times larger than the number today. But no one is even discussing the support needed for 7 million electric cars. And if manufacturers stop making ICE cars within the next two decades, we are looking at 300 million EVs.

We need an improved power infrastructure at a time when places such as California and Texas are experiencing power outages.

Whether charged at home or on the road, EVs need to be charged frequently, with fast charging at home still a future dream, drawing on generators fueled by natural gas, coal, petroleum, etc.

Wimmer was not claiming the above could not be done, but he believes little conversation is being undertaken to initiate it.

It would be interesting to hear from the Virginia Department of Highways how EVs caught up in the I-95 snow delay faired. There are questions such as how far the closest charging sources were located, the waiting time for a charge if multiple EVs were involved and the time it took after the highway was cleared for EVs to get back on the road.

These are all valid considerations that need to be weighed before embarking on putting at least 300 million cars on our highways.

As reported, Sony is now jumping into the EV market. It is hoped the company learned a lesson from an earlier plunge into the cassette recording market in the mid 1970s with Betamax. Sony ended up losing its battle for market share but did not stop making Betamax tapes until 2016, long after the public had lost interest in them, with most unaware that the tapes were still in production.

Betamax goes down in history as one of 10 most famous project failures.

If Biden fails to ensure an EV support infrastructure capable of handling a massive transition to electric power from gas power, his initiative will top the list of project failures. But worse than that for EV drivers, every day will become an I-95 snow day.

AOC a dream date? More like a patriot's nightmare

Thu, 06 Jan 2022 01:51:24 GMT

AOC A "DREAM DATE?" NO. MORE LIKE A PATRIOT'S NIGHTMARE

James G. Zumwalt / January 5, 2022

World Net Daily ... Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., was caught recently in a clear act of hypocrisy .

As one who constantly seeks to impose coronavirus restrictions upon her New York City subjects – lockdowns, masks, mandatory vaccinations, etc. – Queen Alexandria was caught enjoying Florida's maskless democracy at a time New York tallied the highest single day total since its outbreak.

Photographed in Miami with a male friend, both maskless , AOC had fled the coronavirus cloud of New York City for sun and fun in COVID-19 restrictionless Florida – a state boasting the fewest cases in the nation.

As the photograph made the internet rounds, AOC was hit with tremendous backlash. As we all seek vacations in fun environments, she selected a Republican-governed state – a political slap in the face to Democratic-governed New York. Yet the rant AOC posted after receiving the backlash, even compared to her normal racist-centric accusations against critics, was astonishingly stupid:

"If Republicans are mad they can't date me, they can just say that instead of projecting their sexual frustrations onto my boyfriend's feet. Ya creepy weirdos. It's starting to get old ignoring the very obvious, strange, and deranged sexual frustrations that underpin the Republican fixation on me, women, & LGBT+ people in general.

These people clearly need therapy, won't do it, and use politics as their outlet instead. It's really weird."

Never before in American political debate has an elected official, confronted about an act of shameless hypocrisy, upon reaching into her bag of defenses oriented to calling critics racist only to find it empty of a substantive reply in this instance, offered up a senseless, cringe-worthy and totally non-responsive excuse – brazenly claiming she is every political opponent's dream date.

Explaining AOC's need to make an astonishingly child-like, self-aggrandizing comment is best addressed by recounting an observation made by one understanding the child psyche best – the famous children's author Dr. Seuss. He wrote, "Fantasy is a necessary ingredient in living; it's a way of looking at life through the wrong end of a telescope."

There should be little doubt, from AOC's viewing point based upon where she places her telescope, what triggered her comments!

Numerous critics immediately sought to burst AOC's narcissistic bubble looking to bring her back to reality.

Political commentator Dave Rubin wrote, "People are fixated with you for being an entitled, hypocritical, socialist, lockdown happy, vaccine mandate-ho while vacationing in the free state of Florida. You just suck as a person and as a public servant. That's really the extent of it."

Editor Jon Gabriel mocked, "The only reason anyone disagrees with my articles is because I'm so hot."

Writer Tim Carney underscored AOC's bad judgment noting, "This is a very weird thought to make public."

Writer Andrew Follett must have hit an AOC nerve by commenting, "Nobody on the right wants to date you. Nobody. We just think it's hilarious that you fled to a free state just when your home state is going through a crisis. And that u use ur boyfriend to embezzle money from your donors."

The staff of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis posted, "Welcome to Florida, AOC! We hope you're enjoying a taste of freedom here in the Sunshine State thanks to @RonDeSantisFL's leadership."

This caused a tone deaf AOC to charge, without evidence as is often her wont, DeSantis had "been inexplicably missing for like 2 weeks" and that she wanted to "help with local organizing" in Florida.

AOC ignored the fact not only was DeSantis in his office every day but that he would only leave it to accompany his wife for her scheduled cancer treatments. As far as helping with local political organizing in Florida, while droves of New Yorkers have relocated there recently, based on their motivation for doing so, it is doubtful they would respond to a clarion call from AOC.

DeSantis spokeswoman Christina Pushaw underscored AOC's shameless elitism by tweeting, "I don't mind that AOC is partying mask-free in Miami. But I DO mind that 2-year-olds in her district are force-masked for hours at daycare and NYC schoolchildren are eating lunch outside in freezing temperatures. Rules for thee, not for me' = Soviet style."

AOC's response to getting caught in Florida was also hypocritical as she had criticized Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, last year for taking a trip to Mexico as his state suffered from a cold weather spell that caused power outages. Consequently, he returned early, acknowledging his mistake in having vacationed during such a time.

An AOC apology acknowledging that her response was ludicrously childish and lacking in substantive merit is doubtful. After all, numerous criticisms of her past outrageous statements have never deterred her from uttering more.

Interestingly, AOC is not the only Democratic politician who enjoys decreeing coronavirus restrictions for their subjects while enjoying Florida's restrictionless freedom.

During his comedy days on "Saturday Night Live" (SNL), Al Franken played Stuart Smalley in a skit titled "Daily Affirmations." Samlley, lacking self-confidence, looking into a mirror would embark upon a soliloquy saying , "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me!"

In an updated skit, AOC would have no trouble demonstrating she is ready to be a prime-time SNL player, replacing Franken in the skit, using his same soliloquy only ending it with, "and doggone it, people want to date me!"

Ironically, as AOC is set on building up her own image, her progressive political views seek to destroy an America shaped by patriotic men and women over centuries of struggle and sacrifice. These patriots helped a nation, enriched by capitalist principles, to effectively make the necessary course changes to keep its compass pointed in the direction of human-equality utopia.

AOC's political ideology does not seek a slight course adjustment – it seeks a total socialist course redirection that, as evidenced by all other socialist nations, will only further remove us from the utopia we seek.

In AOC's fantasy world, she may perceive herself to be every political opponent's dream date, but the reality is that she is the nightmare of every patriot seeking to keep America on a steady course to maintain the republic with which our Founding Fathers endowed us!

Let's put wokeism, not founders, in the dustbin of history

Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:49:49 GMT

LET'S PUT "WOKEISM" (NOT FOUNDERS) IN THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY

James G. Zumwalt / December 29, 2021

World Net Daily ... Dec. 26 marked the death of one of the world's most respected figures, South African anti-apartheid leader Archbishop Desmond Tutu, at age 90. An op-ed entitled "Should the Late Bishop Tutu Get a Statue?" by constitutional and criminal lawyer Alan Dershowitz inadvertently raises a question concerning a completely separate issue from its title.

Tutu, by virtue of his life as an activist, bequeathed to his countrymen a liberated South Africa. While many young South Africans knew him only as an archbishop, his death caused them to educate themselves on his accomplishments.

Doing so, one young student commented, "I think that people who fought for our freedom are great people. We are in a better place because of them. Today, I am living my life freely, unlike in the olden days where there was no freedom."

It is an interesting observation in view of woke activists' criticism of our own Founding Fathers.

With the plague of wokeism upon us, carriers of the disease seek to look at our 18th and 19th century leaders through a 21st century lens. Therefore, they brazenly impart to them wisdom that went unappreciated in America until much later in our history.

It is like imparting 21st century medical advances upon 18th/19th century physicians and then faulting them for using archaic treatments based on what is known today.

Thus, the fact that some Founding Fathers owned slaves has caused cancel culture activists to relegate historic patriots like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson to the dustbin of history.

They seek the destruction or removal of statues of our Founding Fathers so that 21st century snowflake activists no longer need endure the horrendous suffering of encountering historical accounts of human non-equality.

Of note too is that we have yet to see what "hero standard" – if one even exists – cancel culture activists accept as being statue-worthy. One appears to be non-existent since we have witnessed the destruction, defacing or removal, not only of our past patriotic heroes, but also of our spiritual leaders.

Statues of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary have been desecrated, demonstrating no boundaries exist to the hatred wokeism triggers.

If any statues of Prophet Muhammad existed, it would be interesting to see if they too fell victim to wokeism. But, this we will never know as Islam bans any physical depiction of the prophet, whether in art or statue form. This was partly responsible for the Muslim violence triggered by the 2005 publication in a Danish newspaper of several cartoons depicting Muhammad.

The newspaper's intent was only to spark debate regarding criticism of Islam and its self-censorship. No debate ensued, however, as it only sparked Muslim violence for ridiculing the prophet, eventually forcing an apology from the newspaper.

This brings us back to the issue of whether Tutu is statue-worthy. In the Dershowitz article, the author shares details about the archbishop's dark history.

Despite all the good he accomplished for South Africans, as with all humans, Tutu also had his faults – he was intensely anti-Semitic.

Dershowitz wrote about Tutu...

..."His recognizable face – with its ever-present grin – has become a symbol of reconciliation and goodness. But it masks a long history of ugly hatred toward the Jewish people, the Jewish religion and the Jewish state. He not only believed in anti-Semitism, he actively promoted and legitimated Jew-hatred among his many followers and admirers around the world."

Tutu's hatred for Jews was disturbing, particularly coming from a man of the cloth. He even "minimized the suffering of those killed in the Holocaust," claiming Jews have caused many of the world's problems.

While woke activists unfairly scrutinize our Founding Fathers through a 21st century human-value lens, Tutu actually lived over two decades of his life in that century. Therefore, to be fair, his hatred should be scrutinized through that same lens.

His personal disdain toward a class of humanity, continuing into the 21st century, is much more unforgivable – for one supposedly possessing today's human-equality values – than that of our Founding Fathers who did not possess them. It should give holier-than-thou woke activists pause to reflect on denying Tutu a statue.

But the question of Tutu deserving a statue raises the broader issue of how far society is willing to allow wokeism to drive the reality of our history. Burying the legacy of those who did so much to start our own march to freedom in America, dismissing them as our heroes due to flaws non-existent at their time but only perceived much later, imparts to these activists a perfection they themselves lack.

The problem with wokeism, and canceling symbols its activists identify for targeting, is that this disease ultimately afflicts individuals differently. One person's affliction does not necessarily mean all woke activists suffer the same affliction.

Thus, for any symbol found non-offensive by the vast majority of such activists, there undoubtedly is an activist out there who will find it otherwise.

But these activists are being accommodated by a society hellbent on, incorrectly, being on the right side of history by burying it.

Sadly, it is the vast majority of Americans losing out due to society's accommodation of all such activists. Our true history of the evolutionary journey to reach human-equality utopia becomes disjointed.

This is reflected by the 1619 Project representing an effort to advance American history's starting time by more than a century and a half – and now being taught in 4,500 schools – despite critics noting historical inaccuracies.

Ever since our independence in 1776, Americans have contributed to the human rights equality journey. All must be remembered for their individual contributions as well as any delays they caused. But they should not be relegated to the dustbin of history.

Hopefully, at some future point in time before doing much more damage, it will be wokeism enriching history's dustbin.

Our Mideast Airstrikes Have Been Ugly for Both the Good and the Bad

Thu, 23 Dec 2021 01:58:48 GMT

OUR MIDEAST AIRSTRIKES HAVE BEEN UGLY FOR BOTH GOOD AND BAD

James G. Zumwalt / December 22, 2021

World Net Daily ... In Afghanistan in July 2006, a U.S. reconnaissance drone spotted 190 Taliban fighters, all standing in the open, in a neat, tight formation, shoulder to shoulder, with no civilians around. It was a target acquisitioner's dream come true, providing an opportunity to deal the militants a devastating blow.

As all airstrikes required command authority, planners awaited final authorization before engaging the enemy. But the operation ground to a halt when orders were received the Taliban were not to be engaged.

After careful analysis of the reconnaissance video by intelligence personnel, it was determined the militants had assembled in a cemetery to attend a funeral for a fallen comrade. In such a situation, the rules of engagement prohibited attacking enemy forces.

Undoubtedly, had the tables been reversed, there is little doubt the Taliban would have ignored the rules of fair play and attacked our soldiers. But the mission that day was abandoned by the Americans with no regrets.

Although we will never know how many more American lives would be lost by failing to take out the 190 Taliban soldiers spared that day, nonetheless we had played by the Queensberry rules .

Fast forward 15 years to 2021 as President Joe Biden orders an Afghanistan withdrawal that was pure chaos, allowing the Taliban to capture the country before the U.S. could even get all its forces, citizens and Afghan allies out, leaving behind $83 billion worth of military equipment in the process.

As U.S. forces guarded the withdrawal at Kabul Airport, a suicide bomber killed 13 of our warriors, along with dozens of fleeing Afghans. Learning the attack was carried out by the anti-Taliban terrorist group ISIS-K, American commanders quickly tried to locate the plotters to conduct a retaliatory strike.

Within a very short period of time, an ISIS-K suspect was located as he was transporting numerous explosive devices in his vehicle.

A strike was ordered. Sadly, the vehicle was not that of a terrorist but of an Afghan aid worker and his children. Ten people were killed in the attack.

These two incidents reveal two opposite ends of the spectrum in the conduct of military airstrikes.

In the 2006 incident, adequate time was taken for intelligence officers to carefully assess the aerial video of the target's location to determine what had generated such a large assembly of enemy soldiers in one place and in such an exposed position. As that became clear, the law of land warfare dictated the enemy was in a safe zone where it could not be attacked.

In the 2021 incident, it is clear that America's chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan infuriated the American public, which blamed Biden and those military leaders responsible for overseeing it. The death of the 13 Americans further inflamed public opinion.

Military commanders who normally would exercise extreme caution before initiating such a retaliatory strike, may, perhaps, have been motivated to move faster than usual to atone for the terrorist attack.

That retaliatory strike did seem to come much too quickly to be based on solid intelligence. Yet, shockingly, no one involved in the operation was ever held accountable for the tragic loss of innocent lives.

Does that suggest senior commanders, knowingly responsible for their subordinates sacrificing accurate intelligence in favor of speed, sought to cover their own tracks by dismissing accountability for all involved?

After all, military commanders have been relieved of duty for committing far less, such as Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller – the Marine battalion commander relieved of duty for simply going public about the irresponsible actions of his senior commanders leading to the 13 deaths. Biden ultimately announced impunity for all involved in the tragic airstrike.

While our initial instinct might be to think what a difference 15 years of warfare made in how target acquisition assessments were undertaken, if a New York Times article concerning hidden Pentagon reports it recently obtained is accurate, failed military targeting incidents in the Middle East were more common than realized.

The reports, including 2016 airstrikes in Syria and both a 2015 and 2017 bombing in Iraq, reveal a pattern of inaccurately conducted missions resulting in numerous civilian casualties due to faulty intelligence.

The 2015 airstrike in Iraq occurred after someone was observed dragging a heavy object into a building defended by ISIS. Only after the strike was it learned the object being dragged was a dead child who had been killed during nearby violence.

The 2016 airstrike was of "staging areas" maintained by the terrorist group ISIS in Syria. Since the targets were hit late at night, it was not noticed that over 120 villagers – mostly farmers – were present at the time.

In 2017, as a vehicle fleeing Iraq reportedly had a bomb in it, a U.S. airstrike was called in. Only later was it learned the occupants were a family attempting to escape battlefield violence.

While such attacks increased during the tenure of the supposedly transparent administration of President Barack Obama and despite sophisticated Pentagon algorithms for determining civilian casualties, the numbers for the latter were often erased.

Again, as with the Afghanistan retaliatory strike, there was not a single record indicating those responsible for the faulty strikes were ever held accountable. Meanwhile, Obama claimed the strikes were "the most precise in American history," noting America's "extraordinary" technology neutralized the right people while not harming the wrong ones.

But Pentagon reports failed to support Obama's claim. As a result, few condolences were ever even offered to family survivors.

Our Mideast aircraft strikes have proven to be ugly – taking out both the good and the bad guys.

Perhaps our senior military leaders should spend less time worrying about teaching Critical Race Theory and catering to non-existent biological genders – placing woke-pronouns into the military lexicon – by devoting more time instead to training our forces on how to conduct better targeting.

COVID crackdowns: Can over 400 studies be wrong?

Sat, 18 Dec 2021 01:24:04 GMT

COVID CRACKDOWNS: CAN OVER 400 STUDIES BE WRONG?

James G. Zumwalt / December 17, 2021

World Net Daily ... A tremendous body of evidence concerning the effectiveness of compulsory COVID interventions – including lockdowns, shelter-in-place policies, mask mandates, school closures, etc., seeking to curb transmission or reduce the number of deaths from the virus – all accumulated from over 400 studies, has reached a startling and seemingly irrefutable conclusion.

The bottom-line assessment of these studies is that the restrictive policies cited above have been ineffective and, more accurately, not only failures but abject failures.

Rather than positively impacting on society to contain the virus, these measures have had a negative impact both due to their failed effectiveness and their causing immense harm, especially upon the poorer and more vulnerable members of society. Like the numerous foreign policy and domestic decisions made by President Joe Biden since taking office that have been proven to be wrong...

...these studies suggest Biden's director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who has served as a prominent leader during the COVID pandemic, has taken a similar route in regards to the virus by repeatedly making wrong decisions as the country seeks out the shortest road to recovery from it.

Fauci had the gall during an interview last June when asked about the dangers of discrediting public health officials and causing people to lose confidence in the vaccine program to say the following...

..."A lot of what you're seeing as attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science because all of the things I have spoken about from the very beginning consistently have been fundamentally based on science...

...If you are trying to get at me as a public health official and scientist, you're really attacking not only Dr. Anthony Fauci, you are attacking science. And anybody that looks at what is going on clearly sees that. You have to be asleep not to see that."

Laura Ingraham of Fox News was in disbelief, declaring , "The man does think he's some kind of deity. His argument is essentially ... 'I am the science! I am the truth!'" Others immediately slammed Fauci for his "dangerously arrogant" comment.

Tucker Carlson dubbed him "King Tony Fauci" for his self-aggrandizing comments, adding, "Normal people don't talk that way. It's not Fauci who just believes he is immune. You are not allowed to say anything negative about him or the culture revolution."

Also contributing to the Fauci smackdown was Sean Hannity who accused the director of "trying to claim any criticism of him is a criticism of science."

Long forgotten is Fauci's earliest advice to President Donald Trump after the pandemic came to light in which he claimed that millions of Americans would die. He later revised this as he discovered he had relied upon one of many models that were " astronomically wrong" in their predictions.

That would prove to be just the first of over a dozen-plus more incorrect predictions he would make to effectively come up with the best "treatment of the day."

The learning curve for COVID-19 has been never-ending, making accurate predictions and treatment regimes difficult. But it needs to be recognized that having a knee-jerk reaction to implementing plans to contain the virus is not always in the public's best interests.

A good example of this is the state of Florida, which has refused to impose Biden/Fauci mandates upon its residents. Ignoring such mandates, Florida seems to maintain the lowest number of daily coronavirus-related deaths per capita as the numbers in other states complying with Biden/Fauci restrictions experience spikes.

Plus, there is another factor that must be considered in issuing mandates. As noted by the American Psychological Association, it is the potential impact on the public's mental health and well-being due to "the enormity of living in isolation, changes in daily lives, job loss, financial hardship, and grief over the death of loved ones."

Studies are also showing for parents, particularly single parents, there is a great deal of added stress caused by the increased need of caring for children at home.

However, the negative impact is, perhaps, harshest on children and adolescents.

How severe that impact is turns on numerous vulnerability factors such as "developmental age, educational status, preexisting mental health condition, being economically underprivileged," etc. Teen suicide attempts have surged during the lockdowns.

Yet, before we can even get a handle on COVID-19, we find ourselves having to better understand its mutations into the delta , which is now its dominant strain, and omicron variants.

While the latter is quickly spreading, fortunately there has been just one recorded death, in the U.K. And, as if we did not already have enough to worry about, Russian scientists are warning that, with climate change's thawing of the permafrost there, concerns have arisen over frozen viruses from the last Ice Age being released into the atmosphere.

Exodus 9:1 of the Bible tells us that the Lord, displeased with the enslavement of the Hebrews in Egypt, said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh and say to him, 'This is what the LORD, the God of the Hebrews, says: Let my people go.

Similarly, Biden and Fauci must do like the Pharaoh did, letting our people go, releasing them from the restraints the coronavirus yolk imposes upon them, to exercise their individual choice on whether to mask or not, to lockdown or not, to take vaccines or not.

Contrary to his boast, Dr. Fauci does not represent "the science." Over 400 independent studies suggest otherwise. The science has been all over the board.

Those ignoring its restrictions seem to fare much better than those blindly accepting it.

The real national security threat: 'Furby' vs. Biden

Thu, 16 Dec 2021 00:53:40 GMT

THE REAL NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT: "FURBY" VS. BIDEN

James G. Zumwalt / December 15, 2021

World Net Daily ... In October 1998, a cute, cuddly, synthetic-hair-covered toy animal – Furby – hit the market, becoming an overnight sensation. Yet three months later, it would be designated a national security threat. Why?

The hamster-like looking robot spoke a made-up language of gibberish before suddenly starting to communicate in ever-improving English. It was as if Furby soaked up what was said in its presence, filing away words for later use in conversation.

U.S. intelligence agencies labeled it a national security threat, concerned it contained a recording device that might innocently replay classified discussions. Additionally, as Furby used infrared sensing to detect light and to communicate with fellow Furbies, the Federal Aviation Administration worried it might disrupt electronic equipment.

It was eventually determined the only thing to fear was fear itself – the toy contained no recording device nor posed any threat to air safety. The country could breathe a collective sigh of relief.

Two-plus decades later, we have Joe Biden serving in the Oval Office exhibiting numerous signs of diminishing mental capacity.

The indicators are endless: using incoherent speech and nonsensical words; failing to remember the defense secretary's as well as his own name; making decisions undermining America's security at the expense of American and allied lives; undertaking actions causing allies to question whether America can be trusted...

... opening our borders to hordes of illegal immigrants containing both a criminal and COVID-infected element; causing an all-time high number of drug-related deaths of U.S. citizens due to an open border policy; inexplicably removing designated foreign terrorist organizations from the U.S. State Department's Foreign Terrorist Organizations list despite no discernible change in status quo...

... undermining public confidence in our military; disrespecting Israel by abstaining in a U.N. vote changing Temple Mount to a Muslim holy site contrary to Jewish historical claims otherwise; implementing policies increasing COVID-related deaths despite promises to wipe it out...

...conspiring to condemn parents daring to challenge the teaching of racial hatred known as Critical Race Theory to their children in schools due to liberal boards of education as domestic terrorists ...

...almost single-handedly destroying our energy independence while draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; destroying the U.S. economy; driving inflation up higher than it has been since 1990; kowtowing to China, creating supply chain disruption, etc.

Biden has accomplished all this in less than one year in office. How can there not be a bipartisan condemnation of such demonstrated incompetence as a major threat to our national security?

Initial responsibility for this falls at the feet of those closest to him – his family members. Wife Jill had to have had her own concerns about Biden. We now know that Hunter sure did.

Messages on Hunter's abandoned laptop computer raised concerns about his father's mental capacity even before Joe Biden announced his candidacy for president. This was done in a January 2019 text message exchange Hunter had with his own therapist.

A new book by Miranda Devine, focusing on the infamous laptop, notes Hunter and his therapist/friend Keith Ablow mocked Joe relentlessly in text exchanges. Ablow queried if Joe was even capable of recalling details with his "dementia and all."

Devine cites a dialogue between them discussing the increased field of Democratic presidential candidates before commenting about Joe as follows...

Ablow: "Your dad is the answer. Any man who can triumph over dementia is a giant. Think what he could do for our nation's needed recovery." (As Ablow knew, dementia is only rarely curable.)

Hunter: "You're such an **shole, but that made me laugh out loud."

Ablow: "Perhaps he can help us remember all we intended to be as a people since he can now remember his address."

Hunter: (referencing his father) "doesn't need to (know) where he lives" because "that's the only thing the secret service get(s) right at least 75% of the time."

In a later exchange, after Ablow asked whether Joe can remember the details of anything these days, Hunter seems to say no, adding, "since it's all fake news anyway I don't see the problem." Crackhead Hunter would clearly see no problem with this due to the treasures he knew a Biden presidency would reap for him.

Jill Biden recently claimed its crazy to call her husband demented. She says he works "almost 24 hours" a day at the job which, were it true (he has thus far taken more personal travel days than any other president in decades) would be worrisome in itself for his making important decisions with little sleep.

It is inexcusable for Jill not to have been concerned about husband Joe taking on Oval Office responsibilities. Living with him every day, she had to be worried about how his mental condition was bound to become an issue at some point. Was she so desirous of becoming first lady that she subordinated the issue of Joe's mental decline to her personal desires?

She had to know nothing good could come from a presidential win for Joe as his mental status eventually would expose him to immense public ridicule, as it has done, driving his popularity down now to 28% among independents.

While Biden recently underwent his first physical exam by a White House doctor, the released report of that examination indicates no cognitive test was administered. The reason is obvious – any test results would then have to be shared with the public.

It is no wonder why, when he first hit the campaign trail, Biden used an earpiece and read from teleprompters. He still does at times as his handlers get nervous whenever he ad-libs, rambling from their script. More recently, concerns have been raised as Biden's voice seems to becoming almost robotic and hoarse.

This comes at a time he has had a lingering cough for close to six months. Most analysts believe if there is any further deterioration in his speaking ability, the administration may resort to using artificial intelligence technology to imitate the president.

Biden's disastrous presidential performance can only be the result of one of two possibilities...(1) He is mentally incompetent and liberal advisers, incompetent in their own right, are running the show...

...(2) the fictionalized Manchurian candidate has become a reality.

Either way, we Americans lose.

Darrell Brooks: Black supremacist and domestic terrorist

Thu, 09 Dec 2021 04:25:23 GMT

DARRELL BROOKS: BLACK SUPREMACIST AND DOMESTIC TERRORIST

James G. Zumwalt / December 8, 2021

World Net Daily ... The Nov. 21 Waukesha, Wisconsin, massacre claiming the lives of victims in what, until just moments before, was the joyous occasion of a Christmas parade, must be called for what it really was, with the factors influencing it recognized.

The act of the man driving an SUV, breaking through barricades set up along the parade route, approaching participants from behind, running them over, killing six (including one child) and injuring 62 others ( including eight children) was domestic terrorism.

It was one undertaken by criminal Darrell Brooks, 39, who, based upon his previous actions and support for Black Lives Matter (BLM) plus other black nationalist and violent black extremist causes, clearly identified as an anti-white racist.

While police claim, despite mowing down his victims intentionally , it was not a terrorist act, the fact Brooks did not know the victims and was motivated by deep racial hatred strongly suggests otherwise. Even left-leaning actress Debra Messing criticized the liberal media's downplaying of the incident as a "crash," trying to minimize any suggestion it was domestic terrorism.

Unbelievably, The Washington Post went so far as to blame the vehicle Brooks was driving rather than the driver.

A "perfect storm" occurs when a combination of adverse meteorological factors come together to create a particularly violent storm. Brooks' actions that evening as well as leftist acts afterward represent the culmination of a perfect storm of liberal adverse factors all coming together, allowing this terrorist act to occur and to be minimized, ignoring it for what it really was.

Moments after the attack, an example as to how liberal ideology has seeped into our thinking was reflected in reports meant to identify and help locate the perpetrator. Initially, Brooks was described as a black male with dreadlocks. To track down a suspect who has just committed a horrendous crime, obviously the more detailed description given, the better the chances of a quick capture.

Yet, in reporting the incident to a local TV station, a man's assertion that the perp was a black man with dreadlocks was deleted.

If a black suspect is involved in a crime, liberal thinking seeks to avoid describing him as such, allegedly fearing police will then approach all black males as suspects. Thus, the pool of suspects in the manhunt for Brooks theoretically expanded (based on America's racial composition of a 12.6% black and a 62% white population) fivefold, purely for reasons of wokeness.

But in this instance, Brooks' blackness and anti-white extremism created a problem liberals sought to avoid – i.e., if systemic racism really does exist, Brooks becomes the logical poster child for arguing it cuts both ways.

One could even argue, since Brooks approached his victims from behind making it difficult to identify their race, so deeply ingrained was his hatred for whites, it mattered not if blacks became collateral damage. Feeding further into this hatred was the fact that Brooks, in a post-attack interview, had no remorse for his actions, instead complaining he was being "dehumanized" as a "monster."

With a 50-page criminal record, having been in trouble for incidents ranging from domestic violence, weapons violations and a child sex offense, it would be difficult to find any social redeeming value Brooks possesses. The fact his own mother has not bothered to visit him in jail suggests she may well feel the same way.

In a statement she released , she failed to accept any responsibility for her son's life of crime or to offer any condolences for the lost lives in Waukesha, not hesitating, however, to blame the state's criminal justice system for failing her son.

The liberals' clarion call over the past few years has been to claim that numerous words and actions, often innocently undertaken by whites, exist as examples of systemic racism. But, in the Waukesha massacre, any suggestion that Brooks' actions were racist would not promote liberals' anti-white agenda.

In addition to a leftist media spinning details as they did above and the woke mindset of failing to provide an accurate description of Brooks out of racial concerns, other ideological adverse factors giving rise to the perfect liberal storm that hit Waukesha Nov. 21...

...(1) The hand of liberal billionaire George Soros was involved by creating a lax criminal justice system. Brooks should not have been walking the streets of the city, let alone driving on them. He was a convicted criminal being held on new charges after running the mother of his child over days earlier. He had posted threats online to run others over.

Yet, thanks to the efforts of progressive Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm , who came to office through the funding efforts of George Soros, Brooks was free after making a ridiculously low bail of $1,000.

Chisholm is on record as saying he refuses to process felony cases and, as if dismissing innocent victims as collateral damage, even predicted his bail reform would one day get someone killed. Only after the attack did Chisholm's office admit , based on pending charges, Brooks' bail was "inappropriately low."

Soros is not only linked to Chishom but to other DAs across the country who have contributed to the rise in crime in their cities...

...(2) Liberals' support of Critical Race Theory (CRT), focusing on fanning the flames of racial division, was a factor. We are living in a time when the civil rights movement has made a directional course change, away from reaching equality and toward re-opening the racial wounds of long ago.

To suggest that all whites are born with a feeling of superiority over blacks, as CRT does, and to promote that message throughout society, starting in our schools, does nothing to bridge the racial divide. As in Brooks' case and many others, it only inflames their anger against whites, causing them to take retaliatory measures...

...(3) A tone-deaf state Democratic Party official further inflamed racial tensions by suggesting Brooks' act was one of karma due to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict.

With the Waukesha attack coming in the aftermath of Rittenhouse's acquittal for murder – an event involving an all-white lineup which had liberals jumping on the verdict as an example of a two-tier justice system – Illinois Democratic official Mary Lemanski ridiculously claimed "karma" was paying Wisconsin residents back.

Why even make such an outrageous claim unless it is just a liberal ploy to stir up racial tensions? She later resigned.

Brooks was simply a terrorist looking for a place to strike. He was an unguided black supremacist in need of direction – ultimately provided by the convergence of various factors of adverse liberal thinking.

Aviation cyberattacks: Will planes start falling from the skies?

Thu, 02 Dec 2021 01:02:50 GMT

AVIATION CYBER-ATTACKS: WILL PLANES START FALLING FROM THE SKIES?

James G. Zumwalt / December 1, 2021

World Net Daily ... In November, a conference took place in Dubai, setting a precedent that, surprisingly, received little media attention. It should have as it represented a significant breakthrough in Israel's relations in the Middle East neighborhood. While the main focus of the conference was not a subject matter that was unique – aviation security – the invited participants were.

Dubai, located in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – one of 16 Muslim countries with a history of banning entry to Jews – openly welcomed some of Israel's leading aviation security experts to participate in the conference.

Who better for Muslim aviation security experts to confer with than Israeli aviation security experts who have successfully prevented terrorist attacks on El Al Airlines for decades now?

One would have thought, due to 1,400 years of Muslim hatred toward Jews with some voices calling for the latter's eradication from the face of the earth, such a meeting was impossible. But two catalysts provided the stimulus to help overcome this historic hatred, bringing these archenemies together.

The first was an agreement also deemed highly unlikely to occur by most Middle East experts, although precedents for doing so already existed.

One precedent was set in 1979 when Israel and Egypt signed a peace agreement that has been honored for over four decades now. The second precedent was set in 1994 when Israel and Jordan also signed such an agreement.

Despite the arsonist activities of the Jew-hating Palestinian leadership evidenced by its repeated efforts to set flash fires of violence against Israel, this agreement has survived for almost three decades.

These two precedents paved the way for the first catalyst by which the UAE and Israel were able to reset their relationship – executing an agreement in 2020, under the leadership of President Donald Trump, by which four more Muslim countries joined Egypt and Jordan in a peace initiative known as the Abraham Accords .

This led to Israel's diplomatic recognition and provided a door opening for the November conference in the UAE.

The second catalyst in allowing Jewish feet on UAE soil was the mutual recognition by the host nation and its guests that a major new threat to aviation security exists – one so troubling that it will take the contributions of a broad-based coalition of innovative minds to determine how best to defend against it.

While we have already witnessed the threat's effectiveness in other business sectors, it is only a matter of time before terrorists engage in it to pursue their sinister motives in the aviation sector. The purpose of the conference was to start the process by which any such an attack could be preempted.

Cyberattacks have become the modern-day criminal's technological weapon. Employing sufficient safeguards to shield one's identity or the originating source, criminal hackers enjoy limited risk in getting caught while they shut down database access critical to the operation of a business.

We have already seen hackers successfully take down the largest fuel pipeline in the U.S., creating shortages across our East Coast – the result simply in this case of a compromised password. Also a victim of a cyberattack was the computer systems for Universal Health Services, denying medical personnel access to critical information with which to make lifesaving decisions.

While the average hacker usually demands a ransom to release a system's lockdown, a terrorist hacker will seek a much higher price – human lives – with no negotiations to be undertaken to save them.

In the aviation sector, while older aircraft are less vulnerable, newer passenger aircraft are extremely vulnerable.

Imagine a pilot unable to regain control of a plane taken over by terrorist hackers. In effect, we could see a repeat of the 9/11 attack by terrorists who, safely operating on the ground, are able to create the same impact without sacrificing their own lives.

We could well see airliners fall from the skies should terrorists develop this technical capability, effectively destroying the air travel industry for years to come.

With today's advanced technology, cyberattacks present a threat with almost unlimited targeting capability. As the U.S. is now being put on the road to gasless vehicles and as more electric cars evolve, just think about cyberattacks being directed against them, effectively taking away control of vehicles from drivers, hijacked then to conduct kamikaze-like attacks.

Globally, the number of internet-connected cars in 2019 was 34% with an expected increase to 80% by 2035. Recognizing this and the potential threat it creates, Panasonic Corporation is developing a security system to prevent cyberattacks in cars.

It involves installing software in vehicles that then would be monitored 24/7 by dedicated teams, located both at Panasonic and at the automaker's facilities, to detect abnormalities.

Following the 9/11 attacks, it took the air passenger industry almost two years to recover. This was despite the fact immediate steps were taken to implement security measures that, to date, have avoided a repeat occurrence. Successful terrorist hacking attacks could sideline the industry for much longer.

Interestingly, one of the most important but overlooked aviation security issues of the day created a breakthrough opportunity for both Muslims and Jews to reevaluate their relationship and put 1,400 years of hatred behind them to find a solution.

That is quite a testimonial as to the seriousness of this threat and the need to jointly find such a solution.

Is Hillary next to fall in Durham investigation?

Fri, 26 Nov 2021 01:50:05 GMT

IS HILLARY NEXT TO FALL IN DURHAM INVESTIGATION?

James G. Zumwalt /November 25, 2021

World Net Daily ... The folktale "The Gingerbread Man" is the tale of a farmer's wife who bakes a gingerbread man that suddenly springs to life, running from numerous pursuers, while repeatedly bragging he will never be caught. However, he ultimately meets his end when a sly fox gobbles him up.

While there are various morals to the story, one warns braggarts to exercise caution lest their boasts trigger their own demise.

Based on twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's recent boast, she ignores the morale.

Following the indictment of Steve Bannon for failing to respond to a subpoena issued by a House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill non-violent riot, a taunting Clinton boasted by retweeting the fact she "has never been indicted for anything."

While accurate, she shrugs off three incidents that normally should cause a braggart not to poke a finger into the eye of Lady Justice by making such a boast.

Hillary committed two transgressions for which she was most fortunate not to have been indicted, but really should have. And, by choosing to boast about this, she ignores her involvement in yet another indictable transgression – the facts of which are only now coming to light – that may well trigger her demise.

The first transgression occurred in January 1995 when Independent Counsel Ken Starr deposed then-President Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary as he investigated the suicide of White House adviser Vince Foster and other issues stemming from the Whitewater land deal scandal. In his 2018 memoir , Starr compared the answers both Clintons gave to questions.

He reported that President Clinton "bobbed and weaved, but was always pleasant even as he avoided answering," while Hillary was a different story.

Of Hillary Clinton, Mr. Starr wrote, "In the space of three hours, she claimed, by our count, over a hundred times that she 'did not recall' or 'did not remember.'

This suggested outright mendacity. … human memory is notoriously fallible, but her strained performance struck us as preposterous." Starr seriously considered criminal charges against Hillary but opted not to do so due to difficulty proving she had lied. But, clearly, Mrs. Clinton dodged an indictment bullet in 1995.

As for her second transgression, the following timeline is relevant. In February 2013, Hillary Clinton resigned as secretary of state under President Barack Obama.

In March 2015, it was revealed she had used an unauthorized email carrier to conduct business as secretary of state, possibly committing a security no-no by transmitting classified information over it. In April 2015, she announced her candidacy for the 2016 presidential election.

This unauthorized-carrier activity ultimately triggered an FBI investigation – an agency headed by James Comey.

Of relevance is that, at this time, there was an ongoing investigation into possible illegal activities by President Donald Trump that were alleged in a report put together by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele .

The Steele report suggested Trump had colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Of concern is how heavily weighted against Trump and pro-Hillary were members of the investigative team. This is of import if one considers the laxity with which Hillary was questioned by the FBI about her unauthorized server – not only was the interview not recorded, she was not even put under oath.

Additionally, members of her staff who might be possible witnesses were allowed to remain present while Hillary was questioned.

While Hillary was not indicted for this transgression either, of interest is the first draft of the report Comey wrote downplaying her possible criminal conduct.

The initial draft was suspicious for two reasons...

...(1) it was written before Hillary was even interviewed, suggesting the interview was mere formality and not intended as a true fact finding effort...

... (2) the term initially used by James Comey to describe Hillary's conduct in that report was "grossly negligent" – which was the exact standard of guilt required by law – but was quickly deleted after Comey was advised of this, replaced instead with the non-culpatory words "extremely careless."

Comey's report exonerating Hillary was unsurprising. He had a long history of not finding the Clintons guilty of questionable activities.

Additionally, some FBI agents were also rankled by Obama's emails to influence the outcome of Comey's report as the president, too, had communicated with Hillary on her unauthorized carrier. Once again, Hillary was fortunate to dodge an indictment bullet.

Hillary's third transgression is emerging from the investigation conducted by Special Counsel John Durham into the origins of the Trump/Russia collusion claims emanating from the Steele report. Now into his third year, Durham has filed two indictments that appear to beat a path directly to Hillary's door.

One indictment is against former Hillary attorney Micheal Sussmann for allegedly lying to the FBI in 2016. He failed to disclose something that immediately would have made the Steele report suspect – i.e., that he was on Hillary's pay roster. Sussman worked for the law firm of Perkins Cole, which Hillary and her campaign had hired and for which Steele had prepared his report.

The second Durham indictment roped in Igor Danchenko – the Russian-born analyst behind the Steele report – who lied several times to the FBI concerning the work he did on it.

A "wow" observation from one who has been closely following Durham's actions tells us, "while there is still so much we do not know about the Russiagate investigation, we can say with a certainty that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's role was NOT to find wrongdoing but to cover up the wrongdoing perpetrated by the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign."

Former Bill Clinton adviser Dick Morris has predicted that Sussmann's indictment will lead to a Hillary indictment. Just like the fox eventually did with the gingerbread man, "It might be that we've finally caught up with Hillary," Morris added.

While Morris noted the Sussmann indictment was prompted by the fact the five-year statute of limitations was about to run out, he said "the real point here is that the trail … leads to Hillary. The point is that that led to two years of investigating and almost impeaching Trump, and it was totally phony."

He also suggested that, since she is no longer in power, Hillary can no longer escape her misdeeds.

In the fable, the gingerbread man taunted his pursuers with, "Run, run, as fast as you can, you can't catch me, I'm the gingerbread man!" The last one to hear him say that was the fox. Hillary may experience a similar fate as additional Durham indictments are filed.

The enemy soldier who saved America

Thu, 25 Nov 2021 15:52:59 GMT

THE ENEMY SOLDIER WHO SAVED AMERICA

James G. Zumwalt / November 24, 2021

World Net Daily ... Almost six decades ago this month, an international crisis, bringing the U.S. and Soviet Union to the brink of nuclear war, ended without doing so.

U.S. citizens denigrating America today for its historical transgressions and other shortcomings fail to understand something a Soviet soldier understood long ago: that the America created under our Constitution, despite past imperfections, continuously strives for perfection. As such, it offers more than any other member of the world community can.

This recognition would cost the Soviet soldier his life.

In October 1962, the discovery the Soviet Union had secretly placed nuclear-capable missiles in Cuba launched the crisis . Tensions increased as President John F. Kennedy pressed Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to remove them, but he refused to do so.

Khrushchev viewed Kennedy as a softball player unable to deal with the Soviet leader's hardball pitches. After all, three months after taking office, Kennedy suffered the CIA's botched "Bay of Pigs" invasion of Cuba. Additionally, six weeks later, in June 1961, in a face-to-face summit with Khrushchev in Vienna, Austria, Kennedy performed badly, later admitting Khrushchev "beat the hell" out of him.

Thus, Khrushchev saw Kennedy with an 0-2 record in foreign policy wins, emboldening the Soviet leader to put missiles in Cuba.

As tensions mounted, Kennedy knew he had to make a hardball pitch, demanding Khrushchev remove the missiles "or else." But to do so, a key piece of intelligence was desperately needed, enabling him to know whether the pitch would work.

Khrushchev had counted on deploying the missiles in Cuba and arming them before the U.S. knew they were there. However, unbeknownst to him, Washington had learned about this while their deployment was being undertaken.

But of ultimate importance at this point to Kennedy was whether the missiles were fully armed and ready to fire. If operable, he would have to take a softball approach to negotiating their removal; if not yet operable, he could play hardball.

This is where a colonel in the Soviet military intelligence (GRU) by the name of Oleg Vladimirovich Penkovsky came into the picture.

Recognized early on in his career by his Soviet superiors as a very good intelligence officer, Penkovsky quickly rose in rank.

However, as he did so, he also became more and more disillusioned about the Soviet system, leading him in April 1961 to approach the West about spying.

Penkovsky traveled frequently to England and France as a representative of a Soviet scientific research delegation. Thus, he was able to meet with European and American handlers without drawing suspicion from his superiors. In doing so, he provided a treasure trove of intelligence, motivated purely for ideological reasons as he cherished American freedoms and values.

Over 12,000 pages of transcripts was Penkovsky's intelligence contribution to the U.S. It helped dispel the West's concerns of Soviet strategic superiority, revealing we actually had an advantage in missile systems.

When Penkovsky was contacted in Moscow during the Cuban Missile Crisis as to whether those missiles were operable, he knew responding was risky and would undoubtedly result in his identity being discovered.Yet, due to the extreme urgency of the situation, he did not hesitate.

He revealed the missiles lacked both their guidance and fueling systems, so they were not yet operational. This crucial intelligence from Penkovsky's enabled Kennedy to play hardball Khrushchev to back down.

It would take almost a year for Penkovsky to be identified by the GRU as an American spy. In October 1963, he was arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to death. How he was executed served as a chilling reminder for others not to follow his example.

Penkovsky purportedly was cremated – while still alive. Strapped to a board, he was fed into a furnace fire, feet first, to maximize his agony. Other GRU members were forced to watch the execution to demonstrate a traitor's fate. His cremated ashes were unceremoniously dumped in the Donski Monastery Cemetery.

To the end, Penkovsky's ideological belief was that the Soviet system was evil and only America offered freedom-loving people everywhere greater hope. Penkovsky wore the Soviet uniform, but his loss was America's loss.

During his espionage days, Penkovsky had appropriately been given the U.S. codename "Hero."

Before the 2020 presidential election, the Democrats' vice presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, had the audacity to suggest liberal rioters destroying our cities were "heroes."

There is no way the millions of dollars worth of property these rioting miscreants destroyed and deaths they triggered justify giving them hero status. They sacrificed nothing but the property and lives of others. Their actions compare in no way to those of a selfless hero like Penkovsky.

Not only does Harris' claim demean Penkovsky's name and selfless sacrifice, it tells us she has no sense of appreciation for the heroes who have long made America great with their personal sacrifices.

Although it won't happen, it should be Harris, the rioters and those of their ilk who should be giving thanks this Thanksgiving Day week for men like Penkovsky who lived and died for an imperfect but free America.

Meanwhile, Penkovsky undoubtedly looks down on our country today, shaking his head in disbelief at the unappreciative attitude of such ingrates for the America that his self-sacrifice helped them inherit.

Tennis star's disappearance 'match point' for MeToo in China?

Sat, 20 Nov 2021 15:41:27 GMT

TENNIS STAR'S DISAPPEARANCE "MATCH POINT" FOR ME-TOO CHINA?

James G. Zumwalt / November 19, 2021

World Net Daily ... China boasts an interesting history concerning courageous women establishing firsts.

The first female general, Hao Fu, lived about 3,200 years ago, led a force of 13,000 male warriors. The first female empero r of China was Wu Zetian (624-705) of the Tang dynasty who achieved that goal and left a trail of male bodies in blazing her path to power.

And just this month, the first Chinese female to walk in space, Wang Yaping, did so as part of the Shenzhou-13 mission at the Chinese Space Station.

A Chinese woman named Peng Shuai, 35, is a double first achiever – one of her firsts representing incredible skill, demonstrated in 2014; the other representing incredible courage, only achieved two weeks ago.

Peng is a professional tennis player who became the first Chinese woman ever to be ranked by the World Tennis Association (WTA) as No. 1 doubles. But a more recent first may well have placed her in tremendous danger.

Earlier this month, Peng went public with accusations of sexual misconduct by senior former Politburo official and Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli. She wrote a lengthy tell-all social media post about the elderly married Zhang's sexual transgressions, claiming he forced her to have sex with him. Zhang served as a Politburo member during the first term of current President Xi Jinping.

As there are only seven members of the Politburo Standing Committee, which is the highest authority in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Zhang is clearly no political lightweight.

Over the past few decades, other Chinese women have leveled accusations against senior CCP officials. However, none was willing to reveal her identity, recognizing the risks of doing so. Due to this unwillingness, such claims were suppressed, dying a quick death.

One of China's most notorious womanizers of modern times was Chairman Mao Zedong whose endless sexual appetite apparently set the stage for leaders who followed. But Peng became the first Chinese woman with the courage to identify herself in bringing claims of sexual allegations against a top CCP leader. As she disappeared shortly thereafter, she may have paid a hefty price for doing so.

Whether Peng's disappearance is the result of orders at the top, from President Xi, or the independent actions of Zhang, remains unclear. However, the fact the Chinese government has censored any discussion about Peng's accusations does not bode well for the tennis star.

China undoubtedly wants Peng's claim, like the claims of others before her, to similarly die a quick death. But that is unlikely to happen. Her high-profile visibility within the tennis world has already prompted the WTA to demand an investigation.

Other tennis stars are calling out the Chinese government as well, such as 18-time Grand Slam winner Chris Evert who has known Peng for over two decades.

Concerns about Peng's fate only heightened when WTA Chairman Steve Simon cast doubt upon the veracity of an email allegedly received from her after her disappearance. He said, "I have a hard time believing that Peng Shuai actually wrote the email we received or believe what is being attributed to her" and that the world needs "independent and verifiable proof that she is safe."

The alleged email from Peng stated she was not missing or unsafe but simply at home resting. She also criticized the WTA for releasing unverified information about her without her consent, further stating the allegation of sexual assault was not true.

But since the repeated efforts of the WTA's Simon to contact Peng have proven unsuccessful and if, as she suggests, she is safe and just resting, why would she not be responsive to his numerous inquiries? Peng's email smacks too much of either coercion or someone other than her being the originator.

It would not be surprising if Peng has been forcibly restrained from having any contact with the outside world.

With China's leadership currently dealing with claims the coronavirus leaked from its Wuhan laboratory, with their beating war drums over reclaiming Taiwan, with concerns raised about their use of Uighur slave labor, while the Peng incident pales in comparison, it too shines the light of truth into the dark corners of China's leadership.

At a time it is content that American liberals are sufficiently denigrating their own country over false evils, it does not want to have its own real evils exposed to the light of day.

The Chinese leadership must be unfamiliar with the lyrics of the Helen Reddy song , "I Am Woman." Those words convey a strong message, "I am woman, hear me roar, in numbers too big to ignore. …"

They espouse the commitment of women not to be victimized again. If the response Chinese leaders have naively chosen is to forcefully silence Peng, they will soon hopefully hear the "roar in numbers too big to ignore" of an international MeToo chorus determined to expose the evil lying within the CCP.

While China's past has encouraged courageous women to establish firsts, tennis superstar Peng's fate will undoubtedly determine whether, for that country's Me-Too movement, it is facing "match point."

There but for the lack of God, goes America

Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:58:18 GMT

THERE BUT FOR THE LACK OF GOD, GOES AMERICA

James G. Zumwalt / November 17, 2021

World Net Daily ... The phrase "There but for the grace of God, go I" originated centuries ago in a more pious and devout era. Believed to have first been uttered by English evangelical preacher and martyr John Bradford observing criminals being led to the gallows, his own evangelizing in 1555 led to his death by burning at the stake.

However, he remained sanguine both about his fate and his faith, allegedly telling a fellow prisoner facing execution as well, "We shall have many a merry supper with the Lord this night."

The rarity with which this phrase is heard today, or even recognized for its historic perspective about faith in God, is a subtle indicator that society has moved further away from the desire, or any feeling of need, to seek out God's grace.

The 18th century English religious writer and philanthropist Hannah Moore wrote about faith, "In agony or danger, no nature is atheist. The mind that knows not what to fly to, flies to God."

A phrase believed of World War I vintage is, "There are no atheists in a foxhole."

For many, there is a need to find ourselves in a situation in which death appears imminent, the ability to control circumstances seems hopeless, and one "knows not what to fly to" before faith finally kicks in.

World War II proved to be the bloodiest war in history – a result of the impact of "Total War" claiming both military and civilian casualties. It is estimated over 65 million, or 2.5% of the world's population, perished in the conflict. It was a war undoubtedly causing many who were impacted, including atheists, to discover their faith.

A faith revival evolved after World War II as a result of the sheer number of Americans who had served in it (about 9% of the population) and the even larger percentage who had loved ones so serving for whom they relentlessly prayed.

This revival continued in the military as the American Legion launched a 1954 program seeking to bring God into the lives of veterans. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, whose D-Day prayers were successfully answered 10 years earlier when Allied forces landed in Europe, initiating their final march to victory, said about the program at the time...

..."As a former soldier, I am delighted that our veterans are sponsoring a movement to increase our awareness of God in our daily lives. In battle, they learned a great truth – that there are no atheists in the foxholes. They know that in time of test and trial, we instinctively turn to God for new courage...

...whatever our individual church, whatever our personal creed, our common faith in God is a common bond among us."

Eisenhower's personal experiences in life strengthened his religious beliefs. As a result, a close bond began to form between Christianity and the U.S. presidency in the 1950s, turning that decade into a time of extraordinary religious revival. Prior to America's entry into World War II, church membership was only 49%; however, by 1960, it had grown to 69%.

Eisenhower was a catalyst in shepherding in this revival. In fact, one of the first things he did – only ten days after his inauguration – was to be baptized. As his wife, Mamie, was a member of the National Presbyterian Church, he quietly approached the church about being baptized, feeling it was important as president for him to do so.

He consistently endeavored to put faith front and center in all he did. This included writing a short prayer he recited to begin his inauguration, starting Cabinet meetings with a silent prayer, initiating the National Prayer Breakfast, making "In God We Trust" America's official motto, including its placement on our paper currency, etc.

Eisenhower firmly believed religious faith was the single most important distinction between American freedom and Communist oppression. The accuracy of this belief is reflected today by a serious decline in American society's faith – the result of almost half our younger population embracing the socialism that communism promotes.

A 2020 poll by Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation discovered that 49% of Generation Z Americans have a favorable view of socialism – an increase of 9% from a 2019 survey. Interestingly, this is in sync with a 2019 Pew poll revealing 49% of millennials do not identify themselves as Christian although three-quarters of baby boomers do.

But even among older adults, the numbers of the faithful are declining.

Of the two major faiths – Protestant and Roman Catholic – 43% identify today as the former and 20% the latter, down from 2009 percentages of 51% and 24%, respectively.

And, as far as those who are unaffiliated, self-described atheists account for 4% – double from what it was in 2009 – while 17% claim no religion in particular – up from 12%. Gallup reports Americans' membership in houses of worship dropped below 50% for the first time in the eight decades it has conducted such polls.

The last decade has seen those attending religious services at least once or twice a month decrease 7%.

Our militar, too, has taken a turn towards atheism as the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers adopted the slogan "Atheists in Foxholes" to list those in uniform lacking a belief in God.

Playing a role as well in demonizing religion are the media and educators. Concerning the former, a 1991 study found anti-Catholic critics are quoted by the media much more frequently than supporters of Catholicism. Concerning the latter, ironically 2021 research found the more educated one is the more anti-Semitic one becomes.

Religion was always of importance to our Founding Fathers who considered the Creator's existence "as the most fundamental premise underlying all self-evident truth."

George Washington tied religion to morality, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion."

It was the presence of God in the lives of earlier American generations that enabled them to defeat the totalitarian ideologies of Nazi Germany, Italy and Japan.

It is the lack of God today in the lives of our younger generations that gives rise to an ideology that will be our undoing.

U.S. – China Summit: For Xi, The Stars Are In Alignment

Mon, 15 Nov 2021 21:49:29 GMT

US-CHINA SUMMIT: FOR XI, THE STARS ARE IN ALIGNMENT

James G. Zumwalt / November 15, 2021

A 2012 photograph of then Vice President Joe Biden and then First Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping while in Los Angeles shows the two holding up T-shirts with the inscription in English on Biden’s, “ Fostering Goodwill Between America & China. ”

Nine years later, we see that publicity stunt had no more positive impact on relations between the two nations than did the photograph of a 2009 publicity stunt by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In that photo, Clinton is seen presenting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a red “reset” button – symbolizing hopes of improving ties.

Lavrov was somewhat befuddled by the gesture as the Russian word for “reset” on the button was mistranslated, using instead the word “overcharge” which, obviously, made no sense.

In the 2012 photograph, there seems to be a bit of a smirk on Xi’s face, as if he knows something Biden (unsurprisingly) does not.

Keeping in mind the Wuhan laboratory was already working on developing a deadly virus, designed but for one purpose, Xi’s smirk understandably could have betrayed something BIden did not know then and, sadly, still fails to register with him today.

Xi’s smirk also could have suggested his hope that he would soon see Biden in the Oval Office as he needed a lightweight U.S. president there to assist China in undermining America’s economy and military might as well as winning back Taiwan .

There is evidence now, according to a Chinese whistleblower, suggesting that, in Biden’s run for the presidential roses eight years later, Xi played a major role in guaranteeing his election. The claim is China had five million absentee ballots printed prior to the November 2020 election and put into play.

If true, it is no wonder why Biden received more votes than any other president in U.S. history.

Undoubtedly, if confronted with this allegation, we could expect our mentally-challenged president to argue that could not be true as none of the ballots had “made in China” printed on them!

While Biden and Xi have engaged in telephone conversations twice since the former took office, on the evening of November 15th they will hold a virtual summit .

It is anticipated that their discussions will include a major hotspot issue – Taiwan – as well as human rights and trade, all in hopes of reaching agreement on reducing increased tensions between the U.S. and China.

We need to reflect upon two previous incidents that are most telling about how China views its relationship with the U.S. and how Biden views it.

The first incident occurred shortly after Biden announced his candidacy for president on April 25, 2019. A week later, campaigning in Iowa, he stated that concerns China could eventually surpass the U.S. as a world superpower and economic force were overstated.

“China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man. I mean, you know, they’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.”

The second incident occurred in March 2021 when Secretary of State Tony Blinken met in Alaska with a Beijing delegation headed by Chinese foreign affairs chief Yang Jiechi.

Blinken called out China for various human rights abuses, urging it to obey the “rules-based international order.” Admonishing China, Blinken said...

..."Each of these actions threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability. That’s why they’re not merely internal matters and why we feel an obligation to raise these issues...

...The United States’ relationship with China will be competitive where it should be, collaborative where it can be, adversarial where it must be.”

But Yang would have none of it.

Undoubtedly motivated by Biden’s earlier perception expressed in his Iowa statement about China’s weakness, he launched into his own attacks on U.S. human rights – with anti-American groups in the U.S., such as Black Lives Matter, providing him with plenty of ammunition.

In a twenty minute tirade, Yang countered Blinken, calling the “so-called rules-based international order” he mentioned as the “United Nations-centered international system” and a tool of the U.S.

He accused the U.S. of speaking to China in a condescending manner when it “does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength.”

Yang continued his barrage adding, “The challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated. They did not just emerge over the past four years, such as Black Lives Matter.”

He lectured that, “We believe that it is important for the United States to change its own image and to stop advancing its own democracy in the rest of the world. Many people within the United States actually have little confidence in the democracy of the United States .”

As the U.S. – China virtual summit takes place tonight, we should all feel sorry for the translators involved as they will have to make sense out of Biden’s anticipated ramblings. But it is clear that it will be China speaking from a position of strength to our position of weakness .

While there is a challenging list of issues for discussion, Biden’s “America Last” policy will play directly into the hands of Xi’s “China First” policy , allowing the Chinese president to stick to his guns concerning Taiwan and not to take criticism about human rights abuses about Hong Kong or the Uyghurs .

Having shirked any responsibility for the Uyghurs, claiming the issue was not in his “lane,” climate czar John Kerry has signaled to Beijing that the Uyghurs may be ignored due to China’s agreement to some unimpressive climate control promises.

Doubtful too is that Biden will press Xi for his obvious intentions in building mock-ups of U.S. aircraft carriers in the middle of the desert. Any suggestion coming out of the summit otherwise on these or other issues will undoubtedly be but another failed publicity stunt moment.

Never before in the U.S. – China relationship has China felt so empowered by such a weak U.S. president to pursue its ultimate goals . And it recognizes, should Biden be impeached or die in office, an even more inept Vice President Kamala Harris would come to office.

For Xi, the stars are definitely in alignment to milk the relationship for all he can get now.

Biden's 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire?' illegals program

Sat, 13 Nov 2021 04:27:14 GMT

BIDEN'S "WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE?" PROGRAM FOR ILLEGALS

James G. Zumwalt / November 12, 2021

World Net Daily ... Generations ago, before electronic games and televisions kept them inside, kids came up with ways to amuse themselves outside the home. One senseless fad that evolved was picking daisies growing wild in a yard and pulling off the petals one-by-one, reciting "she loves me, she loves me not." The last petal pulled by a " petal plucker" supposedly gave the correct answer.

This fad came to mind with the recent answer President Joe Biden gave to the same question posed to him by the media earlier.

News circulated over the past few months that, based on 940 lawsuits filed to date by illegal immigrant parents, claiming psychological damage against the U.S. for child separation under the prior administration's zero-tolerance policy, Biden is considering settlement payments of $450,000.

Approximately 5,500 children ultimately were separated from parents who were being held accountable, via criminal prosecutions, for illegal entry. The payments, in total, could potentially reach as much as a million dollars per family.

Some members of Congress, such as Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, were in disbelief such a plan would receive serious consideration. He made the point – hoping it would "sink in" with the public – these illegals would receive more than families that lost loved ones answering the call to defend our nation; they only received a $400,000 life insurance payment.

Biden's plan outrageously rewards illegals who, as a consequence of breaking our laws, were separated from their children, knowing full well that would happen.

This issue first came up Nov. 4 when Fox News reporter Peter Doocy queried Biden about the $450,000 payments, asking: "Do you think that that might incentivize more people to come over illegally?"

"If you guys keep sending that garbage out, yeah. But it's not true …

..$450,000 per person, is that what you're saying? That's not going to happen."

Biden, either uninformed about the settlement program or absent-mindedly forgetting about it, blasted such an idea as ridiculous although his Department of Justice had suggested such compensation be made to settle the lawsuits.

Biden's enablers immediately went into spin-control mode. The next day, White House principal deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre announced that Biden was "perfectly comfortable" with the settlement program and that his use of the word "garbage" was just a reference to the $450,000 settlement amount. But all this makes one really wonder who then is running the Oval Office.

An interesting exchange occurred with Jean-Pierre when Doocy queried if Biden had considered giving payments to those entering the U.S. legally. When a befuddled Jean-Pierre responded why should we, Doocy countered with – why then should we be considering paying those who entered illegally?

Also seeking to explain away Biden's blast was the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

It immediately informed Fox News a $450,000 settlement plan per family was very much in discussion and that Biden "may not have been fully briefed about the actions of his very own Justice Department … as it carefully deliberated and considered the crimes committed against thousands of families separated from their children."

The ACLU should know since it is helping illegals with their claims.

When another reporter later endeavored to get a clarification from Biden on his exact stand concerning these settlement payments, Biden returned to a petal plucking response. It fell right in line with what Jean-Pierre stated about his supporting the policy but not clarifying support for any particular amount. The reporter queried ...

..."I'd like to ask you … Where do you stand? You said last week that this report about migrant families at the border getting payments was 'garbage.'"

To this question Biden, obviously upset having been caught lying for the upteenth time in his political career, screamed wildly at the reporter...

..."Now, here's the thing: If in fact, because of the outrageous behavior of the last administration, you were coming across the border, whether it was legal or illegal, and you lost your child – you lost your child – it's gone – you deserve some kind of compensation, no matter what the circumstance. What that will be, I have no idea. I have no idea. Yes."

Illegal aliens are already taking a toll on America. Not only financially at a time we can ill afford it but, more importantly, a human toll is involved as violence by illegals starts claiming the lives of our citizens.

Additionally, those responsible for protecting us from the criminal element among illegals – federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol – are being stripped of their authority to so act.

Republicans are preparing to introduce legislation to block Biden's "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" compensation program.

After 10 months in office, it is still unclear whether Biden is actually driving our ship of state. His actions the last week prior to the November 2020 presidential election were somewhat revealing as he took a greatly reduced profile approach to campaigning than did President Donald Trump.

It was almost as if Biden knew he would win and felt – or his handlers felt – he should maintain a lower profile. While subsequent post-election claims of voting fraud by Biden critics were labeled the "Big Lie" by Biden supporters, there is still something unsettling about him winning more votes than any other presidential candidate in history.

As an apparently clueless Biden plucks away at the daisy petals representing various domestic and foreign policies, as with his vacillating positions on the settlement program for illegal alien criminals, we have one more reason to be concerned about his cognitive ability to understand important issues of the day.

But, if on the other hand, he is cognizant of the fact he is merely the face of the Oval Office providing cover for others who, having helped get him there, are now pulling the strings, he is no petal plucker.

In such a case, he more appropriately should be described (cleaning it up for public consumption) as a mother plucker.

Why this Veterans Day is special

Thu, 11 Nov 2021 00:46:55 GMT

WHY THIS VETERANS DAY IS SPECIAL

James G. Zumwalt / November 10, 2021

World Net Daily ... With the 100th anniversary of the dedication of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier making this Nov. 11 special, it is a good time to revisit the history of Veterans Day and where it is officially observed in Washington, D.C.

World War I, originally known as "The Great War" or "the war to end all wars" (only after a second world war proved the latter term wrong was it then recognized as the first world war) ended on the 11th day of the 11th month at the 11th hour in 1918 – the exact time an armistice took effect.

Thus, in 1938, Congress passed legislation to establish 11 November as "Armistice Day" to honor veterans who had fought in it.

However, in 1954, after the U.S. had fought two more conflicts – World War II and Korea – due to pressure from veterans groups seeking to honor all who served in America's wars, the 1938 legislation was amended by replacing "Armistice" with "Veterans."

Official observations of Veterans Day involve a ceremony in Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia in front of one of the most visited sites there – the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. The president of the United States traditionally places a wreath at the Tomb to honor those who have served in all our wars and those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

The Tomb contains the remains of an unidentified soldier who died in World War I. He was laid to rest with a white marble sarcophagus emblazoned with three Greek figures representing Peace, Victory and Valor.

On the rear of the monument is inscribed ..."Here Rests in Honored Glory An American Soldier Known But To God."

Situated on high ground at almost the perfect geographic center of the cemetery, the Tomb " exemplifies valor and honor by remembering those who died committing brave and selfless acts with no one to bear witness to them.

The selection process to determine whose unidentified remains would be interred in the Tomb was quite involved. It started with randomly selecting unidentified remains from four French cemeteries. Removed, they were placed in front of Sgt. Edward F. Younger, who was also randomly selected for this honor, to choose one set of remains by placing a spray of white roses atop the casket.

Those remains were eventually transported to the USS Olympia, which sailed up the Potomac River, receiving and returning salutes from military posts along the way, docking at the Washington Navy Yard. This Unknown was memorialized for eternity in the first Tomb of the Unknown Soldier established Nov. 11, 1921 – his coffin resting upon some of the French soil in which he was first buried.

The later process of selecting a World War II Unknown was, ironically, interrupted by another conflict – the Korean War.

As a result representative remains from both these conflicts, again following a detailed selection process, were honored by burials at the same time in Arlington on May 30, 1958.

In 1984, America laid to rest an unknown soldier from the Vietnam War. But an interesting twist followed.

Technology had advanced such that on June 28, 1998, DNA testing of the remains confirmed his identity as U.S. Air Force 1st Lt. Michael J. Blassie, 24. The highly decorated pilot was shot down in May of 1972 while flying his 138th combat mission. Once identified, Blassie's remains were transported to his home state of Missouri for burial.

Today, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier of the Vietnam War remains vacant. Its crypt cover has been replaced with one with a different inscription that reads, "Honoring and Keeping Faith with America's Missing Servicemen, 1958-1975."

With DNA technology now so advanced, hopefully we have built the last tomb for any Unknowns.

Ever since April 6,1948, without interruption and regardless of weather, the Tomb of the Unknowns has been guarded 24 hours a day, 365 days a year by members of a special detail from the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (The Old Guard).

To ensure they are junior in rank to whoever is buried in the Tomb, they wear no rank insignia. Members of the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment also place small American flags at over 400,000 headstones in the cemetery for Veterans Day.

While Congress established Veterans Day as a call for all Americans to remember those who served, there are those, both who wore the uniform and did not, who seek to memorialize our veterans more than on just one day.

Among these is Robert Martin who, to mark the centennial interment of World War I's resident representative at The Tomb of the Unknowns, wrote a poem entitled, "In Arlington." The poem so captivated award-winning actor and longtime activist on behalf of veterans Gary Sinise that he had a video done to share the poem with others.

Noting that the Tomb is one of our most sacred and revered sites for all service members and families who have sacrificed loved ones in times of armed conflict, Sinise introduces the poem, read by Martin, recognizing it for bringing to life our military's compelling American story. It is a touching tribute.

Watching the video, listening to the poem, observing the cemetery scenes of row after row of headstones and, later, each with a small American flag fluttering in the breeze, these serve to bring home the reality of the idiom that "Freedom isn't free."

It is disheartening to think that anti-American social activists like former professional football quarterback and flag-kneeler Colin Kaepernick and his ilk could watch "In Arlington" and remain unmoved at the sight of all the headstones of those who made the ultimate sacrifice for personal freedoms on their behalf.

Because of such sacrifice, the American flag still flies high and continues to mean so much to so many who have so served.

Unfortunately, there will always be those who just don't get it – not even when a video like "In Arlington" clearly conveys such a patriotic message.

A double entendre for Democrats: GPS

Sat, 06 Nov 2021 08:56:06 GMT

A DOUBLE ENTENDRE FOR DEMOCRATS: "GPS"

James G. Zumwalt / November 5, 2021

World Net Daily ... Because Jon Birger, the author of "DATE-ONOMICS: How Dating Became a Lopsided Numbers Game," kept an ear to the ground on issues concerning the art of dating, he was responsible for popularizing a term originally coined by students at Sarah Lawrence College in New York - "Golden Penis Syndrome" (GPS).

GPS is a term descriptive of males who, due to there being fewer of them than females in a college, have developed huge egos as they receive a great deal of attention from female peers they otherwise might not attract.

It is a syndrome perpetuating self-aggrandizement, leading adherers to think much more about themselves than they should. GPS has given these male students a certain arrogance resulting in their putting themselves on a pedestal.

Prior to the Nov. 2 elections across the country, the Democratic Party suffered from a political version of this GPS arrogance, especially in Virginia where it had established a majority in the House of Delegates as well as a hold on the top two executive positions of governor and lieutenant governor.

Virginia Democrats were enjoying the fruits of a left-leaning voting demographic for over a decade and believed they were destined to set the course for the Commonwealth for decades to come. But, to their shock, not only did they lose their legislative majority but their top two executive positions as well. Democrats in Virginia, and other states, have been toppled from their pedestal.

Virginia polls had indicated Republican Glenn Youngkin was overtaking Democrat and former Gov. Terry McAuliffe in the days prior to the election. Youngkin was helped by McAuliffe falling on his sword when he (falsely) claimed that Critical Race Theory (CRT) was not being taught in state schools and by his suggestion parents did not have a right to determine what their children were taught.

Just like the phrase "Don't mess with Texas" became a battle cry for residents of that state, McAuliffe's denial of parental rights concerning their children's education obviously motivated them to send the message to Democrats, "Don't mess with our kids." There should be little doubt his defeat was about education and a clear rejection of teaching the racially charged CRT.

Also not helpful was McAuliffe's self-inflicted wound of stating he was upset that 80% of Virginia teachers are white and "we got to work hard to diversify our teacher base." This is despite Caucasians making up 76.3% of the population in 2019.

It is still a mystery why McAuliffe denied that CRT was being taught in Virginia when it was. It suggests either he did not know what was going on in his own state or that he simply opted to lie about it.

Even former President Barack Obama's campaigning for McAuliffe in an effort to perpetuate the hopeful repeat governor's lie did not work to mislead voting parents who knew what was really going on in their children's schools.

But the combination of CRT in Virginia schools as well as a decision by the Loudoun County School Board not to reveal sexual assaults occurring in the schools was too much leftist ideology for voters to swallow. This was the case even after the liberal media did all it could to keep McAuliffe's political head above water by falsely supporting the claim CRT was not being taught in classrooms.

Obama was the right person to campaign for McAuliffe as both CRT and the non-reporting of disturbing acts by students in schools can be tied directly to him. In 1991, Harvard law student Obama spoke at a rally supporting the godfather of CRT, professor Derrick Bell, encouraging his fellow students to "open up your hearts to the words" of the professor.

And, as president, Obama pressured schools to adopt a lax discipline policy making it more difficult to expel troubled students.

Perhaps demonstrating Democrats' arrogance days before the election, McAuliffe encouraged his Hispanic supporters to help the party remain in power by having more children – a sick reason for reproduction that assumes Hispanic children lack independent thought on party politics.

If McAuliffe had no idea prior to the election he would lose, he certainly should have gotten the message at one of his own rallies when an invited celebrity gave a lukewarm endorsement.

The Friday before the election, musician Pharrell Williams took the mic to say , "I'm not here to tell you to vote for a person or vote for a party. I'm asking you to vote and be a part of the process of being a Virginian." He then introduced "the former governor and maybe the governor to be again, Terry McAuliffe."

McAuliffe also had Vice President Kamala Harris campaigning for him. She said something during her visit to Virginia that she undoubtedly now regrets.

Harris noted the importance of the election for Democrats, saying , "… what happens in Virginia will in large part determine what happens in 2022, 2024, and on." In addition to the two senior executive positions in the state, voters also elected a Republican attorney general. So much for Harris' concern.

After the election, progressives began shouting their "racism" mantra as the reason for Youngkin's win. Former Democratic political candidate Lindy Li blamed the 57% of white women Youngkin voters for choosing racism over their own "reproductive rights."

The Atlantic's reporter Jemele Hill claimed the Republican win demonstrates, "This country simply loves white supremacy."

But putting the blame on racism did not reflect a great deal of forethought as Virginia's newly elected lieutenant governor, Marine veteran and Jamaican immigrant Winsome Sears , became the first black woman to hold statewide office in Virginia.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was asked about the results, she feigned ignorance, saying, "I haven't seen the analysis." After regaining her composure, she reported the Democrats' agenda would remain unchanged.

Meanwhile, a speechless White House put a lid on any comments for 24 hours. It was clear Democrats were trying to put together a believable spin on unbelievable election results, not only in Virginia but elsewhere Democrats had suffered setbacks on programs such as defunding police.

The Nov. 2 election results reflect Democrats' GPS arrogance and that the left-leaning policies they embraced are not supported by most voters. It also indicates they need a GPS adjustment to set them in a new direction, abandoning the extreme liberal positions they have been pursuing to embrace more moderate ones representative of how most voters think.

Will logic return to the Democratic Party, or will Pelosi's stubbornness in pursuing the same agenda spell the party's doom?

The transgender Muslim immigrant's 'snowflake xenophobia'

Thu, 04 Nov 2021 00:56:06 GMT

THE TRANSGENDER MUSLIM IMMIGRANT'S "SNOWFLAKE XENOPHOBIA"

James G. Zumwalt / November 3, 2021

World Net Daily ... "Xenophobia" is the fear of strangers. Broadly applied, it means one who fears others simply because they are different, often times triggering hostility in one's words or actions toward them.

Unfortunately, in today's world of wokeism, which seeks to implement changes in our everyday dealings with each other to eradicate or sufficiently minimize our vocabulary and actions so as not to be the slightest bit offensive toward anyone, Western societies have created a class of overly sensitive "snowflakes."

Such people take offense either at the most innocent statements or, as we are outrageously now seeing, when nothing offensive is even uttered. We need to recognize that, in giving voice to a snowflake's unwarranted fear of feeling unsafe, we probably are only encouraging snowflakism.

Take the case of Zeahaa Rehman – a Canadian transgender playwright of Pakistani descent who stars in a Canadian prime-time television series. A Muslim, Rehman wrote an article describing how she met an elderly white woman, moving along in a walker to a voting site, and enjoyed a delightful conversation with her before she cast her vote.

Rehman noted, "I was buoyed both at her dedication to her civic duty as well as her kind words." But what Rehman wrote next is suggestive of a phobia from which she suffers. She stated the following about the elderly woman: "… after she left, I couldn't help but wonder whether – despite our pleasant interaction – she was one of the people who hate people like me..

To be clear, Rehman took offense at the woman – not because of anything she said or did – but only because she was white. Despite the woman's openness and kindness, Rehman feared deep down inside the woman might just hide a hatred for all Muslims.

Rehman went on to condemn other whites she encountered at the voting site, claiming, "Many of the people who had seemingly been nice to me might have voted for candidates who have supported" laws that negatively target Muslim women. Rehman never expressed any concerns over the negative impact her own religion imposes on women as a way of Muslim life.

Continuing to express her self-imposed phobia, Rehman wrote, "I know that many people around the world hate me because of my religion, my ethnicity, my immigrant status, or a combination of all three. When I come across this hate online, I can block and report the sender, scroll past it or switch to another tab if I don't want to engage"...

then went on to attack conservative candidates running on a motto of "Take Canada Back" – stating that it, per se, is xenophobic.

While acknowledging her perception is "unhealthy," Rehman suggested her concerns emanate from the killing of a Muslim family earlier in the year in Ontario.

There are four significant points Rehman ignores while portraying the sensitivity of a snowflake...

(1)... she ignores the obvious. Not recognizing her own symptoms, she suffers from xenophobia herself. Why else would she fear a handicapped, elderly and kind white woman due to the outlandish perception the woman – and other whites – might want to kill her. This xenophobia is not triggered by anything the woman said or did but, rather, simply by Rehman's sight of the color of her skin. ...

...Living in Canada where most natives are white, Rehman may as well suffer from agoraphobia – the fear of being out in the open or in public – as her fear will be triggered any time a white person is encountered. No better example of perverting wokeism exists than for one who is clearly xenophobic to perceive others who are different as being the ones who are xenophobic.

(2)... she ignores the fact that the killing of a Muslim family in Ontario pales in comparison to the 9/11 attacks on America that, comparably speaking, provide ample justification for Americans to embrace their own version of anti-Muslim xenophobia, some fearing, on a daily basis, encountering Rehman or any other Muslim.

(3)... she ignores the fact that, based on 2019 FBI statistics, Jews are the top target of hate crimes. As such, here in the U.S. they are 2.2 times more likely to be victimized than are Muslims. However, the Muslim community is much more vocal about their victimization, playing it up to a media that run with that storyline....

...Those, like Rehman, who suffer from such an idiosyncratic xenophobic sensitivity will continue to give wings to claims of disproportionate racism for hate crimes.

(4)... she ignores that, contrary to holy books like the Bible and Torah, the Quran repeatedly promotes hatred against non-believers. A Quran that encourages violence against non-Muslims provides far more justification to fear violence at Muslim hands than Muslims should fear at the hands of non-believers.

Another incident of xenophobic perception by overly sensitive snowflakes occurred recently at Yale Law School.

After Trent Colbert sent out a party invitation for fellow Native American students to attend a "Trap House," he was accused of racism and told to make an apology. While the term was once used to mean "crack house," it has been taken over by young people today to mean "party house." However, some black students chose to interpret it to mean "blackface party."

Colbert explained that was never intended and, therefore, refused to "indulge this culture of performative denunciation" as any apology would be insincere. Thus, Colbert was able to show how ridiculous demanding apologies for unwarranted personal perceptions of racism are after another student called his excuse "corny."

Colbert said – as a Native American – he could have taken umbrage at the critic's use of the word corny – one connecting Colbert's actions to a crop with immense cultural significance to indigenous communities.

Socratically posing the question whether that student should then apologize, Colbert clearly responded "no." And Kudos to Colbert for taking his stand.

There must be a term descriptive of such over-the-top sensitivities from which these people suffer. The best this writer can proffer is "snowflake xenophobia."

Is China guilty of 5 million murders via COVID?

Sat, 30 Oct 2021 12:15:29 GMT

IS CHINA GUILTY OF 5 MILLION MURDERS VIA COVID?

James G. Zumwalt / October 29, 2021

World Net Daily ... In the face of an advancing threat, common sense dictates initiating steps to either avoid it or defend against it. Applying such logic in the case of China's actions, both before the international community became aware of COVID-19 and afterward, is telling.

A lot of evidence has come to light collected by private investigative groups demanding that those responsible for releasing the SARS-CoV-2 virus be held accountable.

This evidence raises a red flag as to what China really knew about the release and then did to hide its role.

While much of the evidence collected to date is circumstantial, by connecting the "dots" of circumstantial and direct evidence, one reasonable conclusion can be drawn – a conclusion that a Japanese publication suggests that President Joe Biden deliberately seeks to avoid reaching.

Beijing has demonstrated no interest in helping international investigators identify COVID-19's origin. It has gone out of its way to destroy evidence linking the virus to its Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) – the location many investigators now believe is responsible for its release.

Actions taken by China to keep a lid on evidence linked to its involvement includes silencing its own experts, some of whom have mysteriously disappeared. Foreign investigative reporters in China have been kicked out of the country. From China's standpoint, the less known by the outside world, the less likely Beijing will be held accountable for its role.

But the evidentiary dots suggest all roads to the virus lead to the WIV. Some of the more intriguing evidence suggesting Chinese culpability include the following...

(1)... U.S. intelligence knows in a secret 2003 Beijing meeting Chinese officials discussed problems confronting them in a 21st century world – among them a growing Chinese population's need for territorial expansion. While large expansions of territory, such as in the U.S., were ideal for this, the speaker knew nuclear war was not an option – but biological warfare was.

...Beijing was already conducting extensive research and development into this area.

...Did COVID-19 evolve from this thinking? Quite possibly so as we know, today, China is currently researching a "civilization-killing" pathogen, collecting specific DNA samples to develop a profile undoubtedly targeting Caucasians. Boasting the world's largest bio-database, Beijing seeks to make viruses kill for them.

(2)... It's believed COVID-19 Patient Zero originated in Wuhan, China, becoming infected with the virus in October or November of 2019. But it wasn't until Dec. 31, 2019, that China forewarned the world about a cluster of "viral pneumonia" cases breaking out there.

...While Beijing reported the virus source was an unidentified, infected animal obtained at the Wuhan wet market – a claim it later abandoned – this did leave open the question whether it evolved naturally or was man made. (China recently ridiculously blamed Maine lobsters as the source.)

...While the former was promoted by a liberal U.S. press, taking its lead as well as millions of dollars in compensation from China, silencing critics arguing otherwise, it would take a year before the evidentiary weight sufficiently supported WIV involvement. A recent National Geographic documentary outrageously continues defending China.

...Adding to a plethora of circumstantial evidence was discovery by an Australian news source that, prior to COVID-19's international spread, Beijing had purchased tons of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test kits. These kits determine if a patient is afflicted with the genetic material of the virus causing COVID-19.

...While they are used in research, their purchase in bulk strongly suggests Chinese officials were close to their goal, looking for a specific reaction – the kits allowing them to determine whether the pandemic had begun.

...The bulk purchases began as early as May 2019 – seven months before China sent out an international advisory about the virus cluster cases. Interestingly, information about their purchases was erased from the web, only discovered later when recovered by cybersecurity experts.

(3)... A 2018 grant application submitted to the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) reveals an international group of scientists proposed mixing genetic data of similar strains to form a new virus.

....The proposal was submitted by British zoologist Peter Daszak who closely interfaced with Dr. Anthony Fauci and WIV. As one expert explained, such research would evolve into a virus that had no pure ancestor in nature, explaining why we have yet to find a close natural match for it. The DARPA proposal was rejected; the database of viral strains at WIV was later taken offline.

(4)... Documentation has been discovered revealing that neither China nor Fauci have been truthful about "gain-of-function" research conducted by WIV that could be linked to the virus and for which Fauci granted funding. Gain-of-function research involves making a virus easier to move between humans or to become more lethal in humans.

...Recently, the National Institute of Health (NIH) admitted such funding was granted due to reporting requirements being violated. This has now resulted in legislation being introduced mandating that NIH consult with national security officials on research grants.

(5)... With China keeping the coronavirus quiet, it went on to host a superspreader event in October 2019 – the World Military Games – in Wuhan. Beijing would later suggest Patient Zero originated in the U.S., which then used the October games in Wuhan to spread the virus into China – a claim the U.S. media naively pushed.

...Getting less coverage by our media was a Chinese defector's claim Beijing intentionally used the October event to spread the virus.

(6)... While a U.S. expert admits "we can't really say how the virus got to Wuhan," he added there is "not a high, or any natural prevalence of viruses closely related" to it. That fact, plus the fact that WIV was working with samples taken from bats that have a high risk of harboring COVID-19-like coronaviruses "is why I continue to think a lab leak is highly probable."

Conviction for first degree murder in a U.S. court of law requires willfulness – i.e., acting with intent to kill another. This involves deliberation and premeditation. The latter two elements require the elapse of sufficient time so as to allow a reasonable person to reflect upon so acting.

To date, COVID-19 has claimed the lives of almost 5 million people globally. If the virus was released intentionally, China is guilty of first degree murder; if released accidentally, it is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. A Chinese desire to murder Americans is not outlandish – a state-controlled newspaper recently threatened to murder Americans in Taiwan.

One could reasonably assume that taking almost two decades to develop a biological weapon of mass destruction is clear evidence of deliberation and premeditation of evil intent.

Whether the release was intentional or accidental, China must now be held accountable.

USS Evans: Dying mothers fight for dead sons' recognition

Thu, 28 Oct 2021 13:27:10 GMT

USS EVANS: DYING MOTHERS FIGHT FOR DEAD SONS' RECOGNITION

James G. Zumwalt / October 27, 2021

World Net Daily ... This week, survivors of a horrendous tragedy occurring during the Vietnam War are meeting in San Antonio, Texas. They meet to rekindle a previous effort, initiated years ago, seeking to memorialize those lost the morning of June 3, 1969.

In the normal progression of life, children typically live to bury their parents. But, that morning, this progression was reversed for the parents of 74 sailors lost at sea – the bodies of their sons unrecoverable.

Now, more than half a century later, the remaining survivors of the tragedy, as well as a dwindling number of surviving mothers of those lost, are still committed to seeing the names of the 74 memorialized for eternity upon the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, better known as "The Wall."

Testimony I gave the U.S. Senate in 2003 on the "Fairness to All Fallen Vietnam War Service Members Act" – an earlier initiative to have the names of the 74 lost when their ship, the USS Frank E. Evans (DD-754), suffered a fatal accident – sets the scene for June 3, 1969, and what the underlying issue is in having the "Evans 74" so recognized...

..."The circumstances surrounding the loss of the Evans are straightforward...

..."Reporting for duty at Yankee Station off the coast of Vietnam on May 5th, the ship immediately demonstrated she was a valuable asset in the war effort. The crew received several commendatory messages for their professionalism, responsiveness and accuracy in destroying enemy targets in support of our fighting forces ashore...

..."They participated as well in what was one of the largest amphibious assaults of that war. Evans departed the combat zone, along with her two sister ships, for a brief logistics stop in Subic Bay before participating in Operation Sea Spirit in the South China Sea. Sea Spirit involved vessels from navies representing five of our six allies in Vietnam...

..."Evans, along with the two sister ships in her squadron, became the U.S. Navy contingent of a five destroyer screen operating with the Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne...

..."At 0310 on June 3rd, as the ships were still observing darkened ship wartime conditions operating on a specified zig-zag plan, Evans was ordered to take up the preliminary position for duty rescue ship 1,000 yards aft of Melbourne prior to the Aussie conducting flight operations. …"

..."As the Evans attempted to get on station, the HMAS Melbourne, due to an inattentive bridge watch, sliced through the U.S. destroyer, severing the forward third (bow section) of the ship from the aft two-thirds...

...The bow section quickly sank, taking 74 sailors with it. Only by virtue of the heroic efforts of the surviving crew members was the aft section kept afloat, later towed to Subic Bay naval base in the Philippines."

My testimony summed up the Department of Defense's (DOD) reasoning against inscribing the names of the Evans 74 on The Wall and my rationale opposing DOD's decision...

..."The reason given is the Evans' victims do not meet DOD eligibility standards for such inclusion, which require that death occur within the combat zone and as a result of enemy fire...

...However, the eligibility standards cited as a basis for denial have been given a broad interpretation over the years to, in fact, include others now whose names are on The Wall … (despite meeting) the same criteria applied to the Evans' 74."

The Wall was dedicated in 1982. At that time, there were 57,939 names engraved thereon, including 1,300 names of servicemen either missing or who died in captivity. As of 2017, The Wall had 58,318 names engraved upon it.

The process of adding more names began in 1983. However, because this was before centralized computer lists existed, there was often limited coordination between DOD and the various services to ensure the same standards were universally applied. This resulted in several additions involving deaths occurring outside the combat zone.

For example, the 1983 additions included 53 Marines who were killed when their flight crashed in Hong Kong after completing R&R (rest and relaxation) to return to Vietnam. Another 110 names of those killed outside the combat zone or in support of combat missions were added in 1986.

Name additions are now being made annually. The changing requirements above for name inclusion clearly justify adding the Evans 74.

The fights families have fought for such inclusion have been lengthy. For example, it took decades for Navy veteran Bob Brudno to rightfully get his brother's name on The Wall in 2004.

His brother was long-held POW U.S. Air Force Capt. Edward Alan Brudno who, weeks after being released and suffering deep depression, committed suicide. While Brudno did not meet the criteria of dying in the combat zone, his death was clearly linked to the infliction of a war-related mental wound.

One of the other issues concerning name additions is space limitation. Names appear without ranks, symbolizing that all victims made the same ultimate sacrifice, and chronologically, symbolizing those who died together are remembered together.

Space still remains for the Evans 74, but other options – such as a separate, smaller memorial with their names – could be explored.

In 2004, a group of us set a precedent for separate recognition at The Wall with an "In Memory" plaque dedicated to remembering those Vietnam veterans who died of war-related causes but not on the battlefield, such as my brother, who died of Agent Orange exposure, and others, who died of PTSD.

Also justifying the Evans name additions is the fact that just about every state with its own Vietnam war memorial honoring lost sons and daughters have included Evans crewmembers who were native sons. Why, then, should The Wall not do so?

Sadly, the decades-long fight to honor the Evans 74 has seen time claim many of the mothers who hoped and prayed to live long enough to see their sons' names so honored.

Today, their numbers have dwindled to five – all still committed to this becoming a reality. Hopefully, their dying wish is one the Senate will grant before they join their sons.

Wings of Gold’: The female naval aviators who fought for combat flight equality

Thu, 28 Oct 2021 12:31:20 GMT

WINGS OF GOLD: THE FEMALE NAVAL AVIATORS WHO FOUGHT FOR COMBAT EQUALITY

James G. Zumwalt / October 27, 2021

Special to Stars & Stripes ... It took the fight for women’s suffrage in the U.S. almost seven decades to achieve success. From the time the first woman began flying in 1908, it took 107 years for women to see all barriers to their flying military aircraft in combat lifted.

“Wings of Gold” by Pulitzer Prize winner Beverly Weintraub details this long fight by women to take to combat flight as U.S. Navy pilots. The Wings of Gold worn on a military recipient’s chest are considered by many to signify the best pilots in the world. But the fight for women to wear them would require a series of evolutionary steps, created by America’s wars, to be successful.

By the early 20th century, few women had successfully hurdled the gender barriers that viewed piloting of Navy aircraft as a “man’s job.” The wars of the 20th and 21st centuries would change that perception as male military leaders began to recognize female aviators were a valuable asset.

While this recognition evolved slowly, initially allowing women to serve as clerical workers and nurses during World War I to increasingly more challenging roles in World War II (such as technical jobs in logistics and training), Korea and Vietnam, today women have demonstrated, other than for purely strength related requirements, they can do anything their male counterparts can.

World War II created a special opportunity for female pilots. As American industry met warplane manufacturing demands, there was a shortage of male pilots at home to fly those aircraft from their manufacturing facilities to military bases in the U.S. This opened a role for women aviators, giving rise to the Women’s Airforce Service Pilots (WASP).

No better example of the positive impression female pilots made on their male counterparts was evident than to Gen. Henry “Hap” Arnold. Although originally stating, “the use of women pilots serves no military purpose,” he quickly changed his tune after observing them in action.

As a true believer in their flying capabilities, Arnold gave the green light for organizing the WASP, which became the first official corps of women to fly for the U.S. military, although in a civil servant capacity.

In 1944, addressing the last class of WASP pilots, Arnold acknowledged, “we haven’t been able to build an airplane you can’t handle.” Yet, despite their outstanding performance, these female pilots would be retired at the end of World War II, having to wait several decades to finally be recognized for their service with military pensions.

Today’s military female aviators credit the WASP as role models for having started the long journey by which women could become combat pilots.

The Navy’s 19th Chief of Naval Operations (1970-1974), Adm. E.R. Zumwalt Jr. -- who was this author’s father -- took command of the Navy at a time when morale and retention were suffering and the service was experiencing its lowest reenlistment rates in history.

With an all-volunteer military on the horizon, he set up study groups to explore what changes were needed to encourage reenlistment. Among many other problems identified, he concluded the Navy was underutilizing its female talent.

Zumwalt implemented numerous changes, issued from the top down and known as “Z-grams,” to address these problems.

Z-gram #66, titled “Equal Opportunity in the Navy,” ensured subordinate commanders understood “Equal means exactly that. Equal.” A second Z-gram was later required (#116) to ensure commanders knew this included female naval personnel as well.

It marked the beginning of the end for the remaining barriers to women flying in combat. By 1974, Rosemary Mariner became the first female aviator to pilot a tactical jet aircraft. She would devote the rest of her career making Z-gram #116 a reality for her fellow female aviators.

With Z-gram #116 in force, women in naval uniform, as well as those who later graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy, were able to break down the gender barriers that had kept military piloting as an exclusive male-only club.

But, while receiving comparable training to their male counterparts, unreasonable restrictions remained in place --evidence suggesting senior male leadership still lacked confidence in them.

By way of example, such restrictions initially banned female pilots from hovering their aircraft over ships or landing one on a vessel. Interestingly, having experienced discrimination of another type, a male African American officer became a cheerleader for several of the first female aviators, encouraging them to stay strong in their fight for true equality.

Even after male pilots begrudgingly accepted that their female counterparts were every bit as good as they were, the ban against women serving in combat still left them inherently unequal. But modern-day battlefield technology and new wars would change this.

The conflicts we fought in Iraq and Afghanistan brought home the reality that efforts to treat women equally while keeping them outside the combat zone were simply impractical. Technological advancements had obscured battlefield parameters.

As a result, the last barrier to female aviators serving in combat was removed on Dec. 3, 2015 as then-Secretary of Defense Ash Carter ordered the military to open all combat jobs to women -- with no exceptions.

While Mariner -- the woman who became the first female aviator to pilot a jet aircraft -- would retire before attaining her dream of becoming a combat pilot, she lived long enough to see her dream become a reality for others.

Weintraub’s book opens up with how, at Mariner’s 2019 funeral, the famous “Missing Man” formation flown for military heroes did a flyover at hers -- with female pilots at every aircraft’s controls.

In aviation vernacular, the term “Point of No Return” is an assessment of the aircraft’s remaining fuel level whereby a pilot realizes there is no choice but to continue forward as there is insufficient fuel to turn back.

For the military services, as far as total equality for women is concerned, they have now reached the point of no return -- there is no turning back as the last vestiges of systemic genderism have finally been purged.

Due for release Dec. 1, “Wings of Gold” is an inspiring motivational read for all. It is especially motivational for those who, frustrated by a lack of equal opportunity, seek to change the system for the better, despite the long uphill fight they may face.

Katie Couric reveals media's unwavering mindset

Sat, 23 Oct 2021 00:16:13 GMT

KATIE COURIC REVEALS MEDIA'S UNWAVERING MINDSET

James G. Zumwalt / October 22, 2021

World Net Daily ... The recently released book "Going There" by television and online leftist journalist Katie Couric is revealing. She engages in "no holds barred" attacks against those who crossed her during both her professional career and private life, which not only include celebrities but her deceased husband as well.

Arguably, the most significant revelation – although not a surprising one – does not concern an individual but, rather, an industry she has served for almost four decades. The story she shares below makes the message she reveals obvious. The only question is whether this revelation, made by pulling back the curtain hiding the media's mindset, was intentional or not.

Couric's revelation involves a 2016 interview with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. To Couric, Ginsburg was a liberal icon and personal heroine.

She shares that she therefore felt obligated to edit comments made by Ginsburg before the interview transcript was released. Those comments related to a line of questioning Couric pursued as to what Ginsburg's thinking was about demonstrators who chose to kneel during the national anthem as an act of protest. Ginsburg's response was not at all what Couric expected.

The justice labeled the protests as "dumb and disrespectful." But Ginsburg's most biting comments were the ones entirely omitted.

Ginsburg had said not standing for the anthem demonstrated a "contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life. … While they probably could not have lived in the places they came from … as they became older, they realized that this was youthful folly. And that's why education is important.

Ginsburg went on to declare that "I would point out how ridiculous it seems to me to do such an act."

Perhaps in disbelief over what she was hearing from the justice, Couric attempted to pursue the inquiry further by asking if athletes are "within their rights to exercise those actions." Again Ginsburg made clear her view, saying, "Yes. If they want to be stupid; there's no law that should prevent that...

...If they want to be arrogant, there's no law that prevents them from that. What I would do is strongly take issue with the point of view that they are expressing when they do that."

Clearly, Ginsburg was no fan of professional football quarterback and anthem-kneeler Colin Kaepernick who had initiated the whole anti-America kneeling campaign.

Ginsburg's comments revealed that she, at heart, was a patriot – one who, contrary to many of her liberal fans, respected the flag and what it represents. As such, she also probably realized for American democracy to survive, all Americans must share a common core of values, which the flag represents.

By disrespecting the flag, kneelers destroy the bond holding us together, inflicting a divisive wound difficult to heal.

Couric said one of the most difficult decisions she had to make was whether to cut out Ginsburg's more severe criticisms about anthem kneelers. She ludicrously reasoned that Ginsburg, then 83, perhaps failed to understand the questions–an argument soundly defeated by the Justice's very focused responses.

Perhaps Couric feared playing a role in Ginsburg being called a patriot for her stance on kneeling, dinging the Judge's liberal armor in the eyes of fellow liberals who might then condemn her.

In the end, Couric cut parts of the interview out in an effort to "protect" Ginsburg, feeling the issue of racial justice was a "blind spot" for the judge – a comment denigrating a great liberal justice's mind. Couric's decision to edit Ginsburg was apparently eased a bit by an email she received a day after the interview from the Supreme Court's head of public affairs.

That email made the claim Ginsburg had "misspoken," requesting her more biting remarks be cut – a request with which Couric was happy to comply. There should be little doubt, however, had the interviewee been a conservative judge, such a request to omit "misspoken" comments would have made national news – probably on Couric's "Today" show.

An article listing numerous examples of egregiously deceptive leftist edits supports the message Couric implies from her story about Ginsburg. The message is this: As only 7% of journalists admit to being Republican, much of what we read and watch in the media today has been screened through a liberal lens, fed to a public that liberals unabashedly wish to influence accordingly.

Sadly, we live in an era of fake news in which those we trust to report it only deliver it with the political spin they wish to give it.

During a recent interview with CNN's Brian Stelter, former New York Times journalist Bari Weiss admitted, and challenged her liberal interviewer to admit, the above.

Weiss said, "But you and I both know that it would be delusional to claim otherwise that touching your finger to an increasing number of subjects that have been deemed third rail by the mainstream institutions and increasingly by some tech companies...

...will lead to reputational damage, perhaps to you losing your job, and perhaps to your children sometimes being demonized as well, so what happens is a kind of internal self-censorship."

In reference to the story about COVID-19's origin from China's Wuhan lab, Weiss criticized Stelter's own network for saying "it was racist to investigate the lab leak theory."

Weiss added that "People said to themselves, 'Why should I die on that hill?' Why should I take the three or four weeks that it takes to smuggle through an op-ed that doesn't suit the conventional narrative? I might as well commission the 5,000th op-ed saying Donald Trump is a moral monster.'"

Weiss also condemns book publishers, entertainment media and academia for being guilty of "narrowing, in a radical way, what's acceptable to say and what isn't."

Another high profile liberal media voice – Don Lemon – went after social media, claiming regardless of whether or not someone was sharing an opinion on that medium, anything posted should be "based on fact." It was an ironic comment from a pundit who has never allowed facts to stand in the way of making his own outrageous claims.

Lemon went on to ridiculously suggest politicians and the media should be allowed to know the names and locations of social media users who make negative comments about them.

Ever since 1896, the Times has used the slogan, "all the news fit to print." Unfortunately, we have gone from that era to one in which most newspapers publish "all the news leftists find fit to print!"

China's hypersonic missile: Is the best offense a good defense?

Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:56:15 GMT

CHINA'S HYPERSONIC MISSILE: IS THE BEST OFFENSE A GOOD DEFENSE?

James G. Zumwalt / October 20, 2021

World Net Daily ... Sixty-four years ago this month, U.S. fears were ignited by the successful launch of the world's first artificial satellite – Sputnik I – by the Soviet Union. It was a first we were hoping to claim, only to be surprised by the Soviets. In the race to space, we clearly had fallen behind.

Last August, we were again caught by surprise, this time by the Chinese, who successfully launched a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile. The missile circled the globe at more than five times the speed of sound (Mach 5) or 3,853 mph before reentering earth's atmosphere to hit its target.

Had the missile been aimed at a U.S. target at such a speed, its interception, while circling the globe, would have been impossible.

While the Chinese missile is thought to have missed its target by two dozen miles, had it been armed with a nuclear weapon, that would not have made much difference. But this capability with which to attack a target is most definitely an eye-opener for the U.S. intelligence community.

As with the Sputnik I launch, it was caught off-guard, failing to recognize an ideological competitor's technology was so advanced.

As one expert on Chinese nuclear weapons explains, such a capability can be "destabilizing" if fully developed as, in addition to their speed, "Hypersonic glide vehicles … fly at lower trajectories and can maneuver in flight, which makes them hard to track and destroy."

This comes on the heels of satellite images showing China – which is not currently limited by any arms control deals – building at least 100-plus new nuclear missile silos, upgrading its inventory from 250 to more than 350 weapons.

The Indo-Pacific commander, Adm. Philip Davidson, testified last March that an increasing imbalance was being created in the region by China's rapid military advancements. He forewarned that, "with this imbalance, we are accumulating risk that may embolden China to unilaterally change the status quo before our forces may be able to deliver an effective response."

Also testifying last March was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley who – seemingly as knowledgeable about hypersonic missiles as he is about Critical Race Theory – suggested hypersonics have no "Achilles heel."

Milley claimed, "There is no defense against hypersonics. You're not going to defend against it. Those things are going so fast you're not going to get it." While partially right, Milley does not seem to quite "get it."

It is virtually impossible to intercept hypersonic missiles during the "midcourse" of their global flight, but they do have a vulnerability. Upon reentry, en route to a target during what is known as the "terminal" moments of flight, they move slower. Missile expert Kingston Reif tells us this terminal phase may well leave hypersonics vulnerable to interception by our existing SM-3 missile defense.

The Navy has SM-3 interceptors, capable of destroying medium-range ballistic missiles, which move slower than hypersonic missiles during the "midcourse" phase of their flight. These, therefore, could play a key role in intercepting hypersonic missiles during their terminal phase.

Reif explains, "Terminal, narrower-area defenses designed to intercept reentry vehicles as they are bearing down on their target would in theory be more feasible, since at that stage a glider would be traveling slower than a ballistic [re-entry vehicle]." It is in such terminal defenses against hypersonic missiles that the Pentagon is making big investments.

In 2020, Congress gave the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) $400 million for this purpose; in 2021, MDA seeks another $200 million. Unlike Milley, the rest of the military knows a hypersonic missile defense system is not at all impossible.

Reif believes, "Hypersonics have been hyped up to be unprecedented, game-changing weapons," leading some to adopt a fatalistic approach when it comes to defending against them. Other defense experts agree, emphasizing "the hypersonics craze" is unwarranted as "what we're talking about here are prototypes."

Of course, China's recent successful test above suggests a new reality must now be considered.

The U.S. has not been idle in its own hypersonic missile research and development. While last year's budget was $3.2 billion, the 2022 request increased it to $3.8 billion, with the cost of such missiles estimated to hit tens of millions of dollars per unit.

In September, a successful testing by the U.S. of an air-breathing hypersonic weapon was conducted. But cost concerns are being expressed by the Pentagon.

Russia also has become a contender in the hypersonic missile competition. In July, it reported successfully testing its own such missile – touting it as unequaled in the world.

As hypersonic missiles become a reality, it remains to be seen if the best offense will be a good defense.

Biden's new 'prison b--ch' program

Sat, 16 Oct 2021 13:27:26 GMT

BIDEN'S NEW "PRISON BIT-H" PROGRAM

James G. Zumwalt / October 15, 2021

World Net Daily ... Perhaps the most unfortunate male prison inmates are those who become prison "bit-hes."

This role normally falls to the smaller, weaker male prisoners who are bullied by tougher ones into performing any and all tasks, including those of a sexual nature.

A consequence of an executive order signed by President Joe Biden, protecting transgender athletes, is already having an enormous impact on female prison inmates who will find themselves on the short end of a master/slave relationship.

In his infinite wisdom, Biden has unilaterally decided there are no issues of concern in transferring male prisoners who identify as female to prisons established for female occupancy.

Undoubtedly, there will now be numerous convicted male prisoners who, facing incarceration, will suddenly be getting in touch with their female side, feigning transgenderism to avoid the more brutal male prison environment.

Claiming such status will give them the opportunity to acquire their own personal bit-h, or a harem of them, imposing their will upon unwilling women inmates.

While it is currently possible to track transfers of transgenders to women's prisons to monitor the impact, that capability will soon be lost as male prisoners declaring their transgenderism at the time of incarceration will fail to even enter the male prison system.

One "tough guy," bearded, male leader of an anti-government militia group, convicted of planting a bomb at a mosque and facing a 30-year prison sentence, suddenly announced he was a transgender female, obviously seeking the less threatening comfort – for him/her – of a women's prison over that inhabited by males.

Among women's prisons already receiving biological males, self-identifying as females, is the Central California Correctional Facility (known as "Chowchilla") – the state's highest security women's prison in the state – and prisons in Washington state. Neither conditions entry of transgenders into their facilities on sex re-assignment surgery or on taking female hormones.

A California bill that took effect in January requiring transgender relocations resulted in 300 male prisoners applying to be housed in a women's prison. Recognizing the anticipated impact, California is already handing out condoms to female inmates.

Like the wolf who dressed in grandma's nightshirt to deceive Little Red Riding Hood, so too will many males simply claim transgenderism to gain easy access to their prey.

What will be the immediate impact of this initiative?

It will put all female prisoners in harm's way of brutal male transfer prisoners who cut out a section of the female population as their own "pride" – whether those women agree to such domination voluntarily or not. I

t will create a problem for prison officials who will find themselves having to deal with unplanned pregnancies and the legal issues arising in trying to determine who should get custody, outside the prison, of the infant after its birth. In California, there has already been at least one pregnancy as a result of its relocation policy where women describe conditions as "a nightmare's worse nightmare."

It is doubtful we will see a similar rush of female prisoners embracing transgenderism to seek transfers to male prisons, as they well know the brutal realities awaiting them should they do so.

There is one negative impact of this initiative that a naive Biden completely fails to grasp, one that will cause serious psychological problems for female prisoners. Many females in prison are there for violent crimes they committed only due to the influence of a brutal male who manipulated or beat them.

As one critic points out, these women have learned that men "are frequently vicious and terrifying," and now find themselves in an environment where "they will be trapped in close quarters with male bodies," adding, "Being terrorized in this manner was never part of their sentence."

Effectively, a lioness who is no longer threatened by the lion responsible for causing her crime and incarceration, is being tossed back into the lion's den.

There are two primary environments in which it makes absolutely no sense to equate those born female with those born male who later opt to become trans female: in competitive sports – especially where strength and speed are demanded – and in a prison environment where both biological sexes are forced to live together in an environment where strength rules.

A biologist who recently posted evidence from a peer-reviewed study on transexuals that trans women are stronger than biological women was silenced by Instagram. On average, the male and trans female will always dominate the biological female, who physically possesses inferior strength and speed capability.

This is not only evident from records set by each biological sex but also by looking at the U.S. Army's physical fitness test. Modified to be gender-blind, demanding both sexes achieve the same results, many more women failed it as the Army now re-considers making the test more gender-specific.

This disparity also became painfully obvious in a recent Mixed Martial Arts fight involving a biological female who was pummeled by her transgender opponent.

Women incarcerated in prison, upon sentencing, knew they were losing much as far as their rights and freedoms were concerned.

But the one thing they all remain entitled to, and rightly anticipated upon entering the prison system, was that everything possible would be done to preserve their safety and security. Biden's outrageous executive order even denies them that.

Vietnam War – the missed opportunity that could've prevented it

Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:23:12 GMT

THE VIETNAM WAR: THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY THAT COULD HAVE PREVENTED IT

James G. Zumwalt / October 13, 2021

W orld Net Daily ... History is replete with examples of America arriving at a fork in the road, trying to decide which path to take.

These have included declaring and fighting for our independence from Britain, whether to engage in western expansion, whether to enter World War I, etc. For those of us whose lifetime experiences cover most of the 20th century, American foreign policy encountered just such a fork in our relationship with Vietnam.

What is ironic is that, while initially taking the right path in 1945, we back-tracked later to take the wrong one. Doing so left us to fight the longest war, as of that time, in our history and the deaths of 58,209 Americans.

The Vietnam conflict ended in 1973. History tells us it could well have been avoided as we initially enjoyed an alliance with Hanoi in the closing months of World War II – established to defeat a mutual enemy, Japan. Sadly, it created a basis for a relationship attenuated and lost in the following years as we backtracked to re-embark upon the wrong path.

But the story of the U.S./Vietnamese bond that led to battlefield actions against the Japanese – lost, for the most part, to history – is brought back to life in a book written by the late George H. Wittman, "There Was a Time."

As an intelligence desk officer for the Indo-China region, Wittman's older colleagues shared experiences concerning their clandestine actions with Vietnam – operations that would have America working closely with two men who would later be its enemies – Ho Chi Minh and Gen. Nguyen Giap.

Wittman took a literally novel approach to recounting this history by creating fictionalized characters reliving it. In this manner, the reader comprehends what happened through the eyes of the characters so as to better understand the complexities of the multi-national interests in Vietnam – the future of which was up for grabs in the summer of 1945.

The complex interests included those of Japan, which had displaced French colonial control of Vietnam and was clinging to its own control in the waning days of World War II. Once Japan was defeated, France fully intended to retain Vietnam as a colony. While American interests opposed Japan, they also opposed French colonial control of Vietnam.

The U.S. position had been set out by then-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt as he sought to allow Vietnam the right of self-determination. China also had interests in Vietnam, having invaded that country almost every century of the last millennium and obviously worried about what ideology the country on its southern border would embrace.

But ultimately, the most important interests were those of the Viet Minh, a rag tag army commanded by Giap – a force committed to its ideological leader, Ho Chi Minh. He was a man capable of playing international chess with the best of world leaders to forge alliances with nations committed to assisting Vietnam in its quest for independence.

Against this backdrop, the incidents described in the novel involve the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the precursor of today's Central Intelligence Agency. Japan had seized most of the strategic and mineral rich Indo-China region during the early years of the war, and the U.S. was finally able to work more closely with the Vietnamese resistance to undermine Japanese occupation.

Parachuting agents into Tonkin in northern Vietnam, the OSS conducted an attack against the Japanese alongside Giap's seriously depleted Viet Minh forces. Although the attack was successful, years later it would have serious repercussions for the U.S. after the bond between the two countries was broken.

Victory over the Japanese became a morale booster and rallying cry for the Viet Minh who, having been on the verge of destruction as a fighting force, had been well-trained and equipped by the OSS. The Viet Minh blossomed into the capable fighting force Giap would lead in the war against America.

Ironically, it was the OSS that helped an emaciated Ho Chi Minh, on the brink of death from malaria, by providing him with medicine and care. He would regain his health and go on to inspire the fight against French forces and then U.S. forces in creating and unifying an independent Vietnam.

Ho Chi Minh and Nguyen Giap had been hopeful, especially after their joint victory against the Japanese, that the U.S./Vietnam friendship would work to their benefit in casting off the yoke of French control.

But the actions of the OSS that could have and should have been a force multiplier in building that friendship were forgotten as new American presidents took U.S. foreign policy in a different direction.

Wittman's book underscores a valuable lesson not learned – the failure to use even a minor opportunity as a building block for mutual understanding between countries can needlessly lead to conflict, destruction and opportunity lost.

Woman who escaped N. Korea: U.S. indoctrination is worse

Sat, 09 Oct 2021 13:57:32 GMT

WOMAN WHO ESCAPED FROM NORTH KOREA: "U.S. INDOCTRINATION IS WORSE"

James G. Zumwalt / October 8, 2021

World Net Daily ... Life experiences provide us with an opportunity to develop an expertise in certain areas. For example, teachers develop an expertise enabling them to quickly identify students with learning issues, which educator can then help them overcome.

But what about a situation in which these roles are reversed – the rare situation in which a life experience has imbued a student with a certain expertise the teacher lacks? And, more importantly, if the student wishes to share the benefit of such expertise, will the teacher even listen?

Such is the case at an Ivy League college where a student with a unique background is pursuing an education.

The student is Yeonmi Park. She lived in North Korea for 14 years before escaping to China in 2007, where she was forced into the sex slave trade, later making her way to South Korea before moving to the U.S. in 2014.What then is Park's area of expertise?

She says she's grateful for two things in her life of 27 years...(1) being born in North Korea...(2) escaping from North Korea.

Her reasoning is that both of these events that have shaped who she is today. They are experiences she would not trade for an ordinary and peaceful life.

Having spent half her life in North Korea where school begins at an early age to start the indoctrination process of a new generation to support an historically brutal family dictatorship that has ruled the country since 1948, Park knows brainwashing when she sees it.

She clearly recognizes when what is supposed to be a teaching experience stimulating independent thinking by students is, in reality, something entirely different. Thus, she can sniff out propaganda indoctrination that seeks to strip the student of independent thinking. After all, some of the best propagandists in the world attempted to do this to her as a child in North Korea.

But what has shocked Park after settling in the U.S. and attending college at Columbia University is that she is being exposed to that which she sought to escape in her native country.

She undoubtedly has provoked Columbia professors with the statement, but she maintains not even North Korea was "this nuts" in their brainwashing efforts as is the university in undermining Western cultural and social achievements. And, unlike in North Korea, she is paying a "fortune" to the university to be so indoctrinated.

In an interview, Park said, "I expected that I was paying this fortune, all this time and energy, to learn how to think. But they are forcing you to think the way they want you to think. I realized, wow, this is insane. I thought America was different, but I saw so many similarities to what I saw in North Korea that I started worrying."

She was astonished by similarities between her North Korean and American education. Not only did the former expose her to an anti-Western theme but so too did the latter as she witnessed example after example of anti-Western sentiment and guilt-tripping.

And the indoctrination at Columbia University came early, first experiencing it during her orientation week when a staff member scolded her for even liking classic literature. She was told the authors, as racists and bigots, had a colonial mindset that subconsciously brainwashed readers.

Despite Park's linguistic skills (she speaks three languages), she became confused in trying to understand the manipulation of the English language concerning gender pronouns.

As she explained, "English is my third language. I learned it as an adult. I sometimes still say 'he' or 'she' by mistake, and now they are going to ask me to call them 'they'? How the heck do I incorporate that into my sentences? It was chaos. It felt like the regression in civilization," adding, "Even North Korea is not this nuts. North Korea was pretty crazy, but not this crazy."

Park found it useless to argue with her professors and "learned how to just shut up" in order to graduate. As a true victim of an oppressive society, Park had little sympathy for those alleging victimhood in America.

"Because I have seen oppression, I know what it looks like," she said. "These kids keep saying how they're oppressed, how much injustice they've experienced. They don't know how hard it is to be free. I literally crossed through the middle of the Gobi Desert to be free. But what I did was nothing, so many people fought harder than me and didn't make it."

She faults universities like Columbia for poisoning students with the belief whatever sins those before us committed – which seem to a whites only offense – is to be borne by their descendants of today.

This effort to blame today's white students is reflected by their perceptions of the American flag.

While, to a realistic Park, it represents hope and freedom, to idealistically naive students interviewed at the University of Texas it represents "all the sins we've committed against others."

Park shared how bankrupting people of independent thinking causes them not to question the reality of what they can obviously see with their own eyes. For example, at a time people were starving in North Korea, they believed everyone was suffering its consequences, even their leader Kim Jong-un.

She said she initially failed to notice he weighed twice as much as the average North Korean because she had been stripped of her ability to think critically.

But most worrisome about Park's observations is what she shared near the end of her interview. The loss of critical thinking she observed in North Korea is what she is now witnessing in America.

She warns, "People see things but they've just completely lost the ability to think critically...

...You guys have lost common sense to (a) degree that I as a North Korean cannot even comprehend. Where are we going from here? There's no rule of law, no morality, nothing is good or bad anymore, it's complete chaos. I guess that's what they want, to destroy every single thing and rebuild into a communist paradise."

Escaping North Korean indoctrination empowered Park to rekindle her critical thinking ability.

While Columbia University's professors turn a deaf ear to Park's warning, the big question now for other educators is whether they can rekindle their own critical thinking to heed it.

Unmasking the 'fact-checkers'

Thu, 07 Oct 2021 14:41:55 GMT

UNMASKING THE "FACT-CHECKERS"

James G. Zumwalt / October 6, 2021

World Net Daily ... A 1902 song gave rise to the tongue-twister, "How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?" "Could," as opposed to "would," was the appropriate word selection since the woodchuck cannot "chuck" wood.

Taking editorial license with the verse and applying it to an emerging 21st century profession, the following is proffered...

..."How many facts could a fact-checker check if a fact-checker could check facts?" Again, "could" is appropriate since not all fact-checkers do what their title implies.

Numerous professions have names appropriately describing occupation...

...ministers "minister," bakers "bake" and teachers "teach." Therefore, when an institution such as social media engages "fact-checkers," we assume their job is to verify that claims made are factual.

But today, the need arises to fact-check the fact-checkers as some use the title as a journalistic smokescreen to promote personal agendas, bending facts to fit when needed. For them, fact-checking involves spin artistry – portraying a claim according to their agenda rather than to facts. Facts are either buried or fuzzed up so as to make them less relevant.

Despite journalist assertions they strive to report fairly, today"it's pretty much a fact that journalism is one of the most left-wing of all professions." Just look at how an NBC reporter covered for President Joe Biden while interviewing NASCAR event winner Brandon Brown Oct. 2 in Alabama with the crowd clearly chanting "F*** Joe Biden."

She ridiculously told the television audience the crowd was chanting, "Let's go Brandon." So it follows that liberal news sources beget liberal fact-checkers who rush to defend liberal voices.

Their skills are in particular need with Biden whom they often have to rescue from incidents of buffoonery or falsification – a practice becoming more difficult with each word he utters.

An example of the former occurred on Aug. 10 when a clip of Biden was aired in which he said preventative measures for hurricanes included getting vaccinated early, seemingly as if to suggest vaccinations prevent hurricanes. Critics bombarded him before liberal fact-checkers rushed to clarify what he meant.

More on point is a tweet by Washington Post fact-checker Glen Kessler. He gave notice his newspaper would not maintain a fact-checking database on Biden past his first 100 days in office.

Such an announcement about a politician who has built his career by telling one falsehood after another – even forcing him to drop out of the 1988 presidential campaign for doing so – and, especially after lying to the American public he had never been advised by his military leaders to keep a military presence in Afghanistan contrary to their recent sworn testimony – strongly suggests the paper recognizes it can only go so far with its fact-checking defense of Biden before losing all credibility.

Liberal fact-checkers also look to falsely portray conservative voices as hypocritical. Supposedly non-partisan PolitiFact, which seeks to hold politicians accountable for their claims, challenged this statement by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas...

"You didn't see Republicans when we had control of the Senate try to rig the game. You didn't see us try to pack the (Supreme) Court" from nine to 13 members as Democrats sought to do.

PolitiFact gave Cruz a "false" rating, claiming Republicans had rigged the game. However, to make the argument, PolitiFact resorted to leftist spinning, basing its argument on redefining the rules of the game for Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) nominations.

It claimed Republican efforts blockingPresident Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland prior to the 2016 presidential election while supporting President Donald Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett prior to the 2020 presidential election represented "rigging the game."

But, had PolitiFact been fair, it would have admitted rejecting or supporting SCOTUS nominees is in no way similar to seeking to create a majority by expanding the size of the high court. Additionally, Republican actions concerning both Garland and Barrett did not break the rules but followed them. A Senate responsible for giving or withholding SCOTUS approval was doing just that.

One of WND's regular commentators, John Stossel, has even been victimized by the sting of the liberal fact-checker's non-factual whip.

Stossel had posted a video on Facebook reporting facts that suggested a bigger player in the recent California wildfires was probably government mismanagement as opposed to climate change.

He went on to add, "Climate change has made things worse …" making it clear he was not dismissing global warming as a factor. Nonetheless, the fact-checker labeled Stossel's government mismanagement claim as "misleading."

Strangely, to support this, the fact-checker chose to link to another article it found misleading for claiming "Forest fires are caused by poor management. Not by climate change."

Although Stossel's article acknowledged climate change was a factor while the linked article did not – the fact-checker determined its decision that the latter – by excluding climate change – was misleading was sufficient evidence to declare Stossel's – which included climate change – misleading as well.

Of additional note is that the fact-checker is a pro-climate change group called Climate Feedback.

Stossel was able to interview two of three scientists who allegedly provided feedback for the fact-checker. He learned neither had even seen his video. After they did review it, one scientist said it definitely was not misleading as it did not exclude climate change. Despite this admission, neither Climate Feedback nor Facebook would change their claim Stossel's piece was misleading.

Stossel then posted a video addressing climate change myths in which three climate scientists argued we are not doomed because we can adapt to climate change and rising sea levels, challenging climate alarmists to debate them. None did.

Facebook slapped the video as being "partly false," with only one reviewer agreeing to share why. His criticism only disputed the height of rising sea levels. Interestingly, while Facebook dinged Stossel for disagreeing that hurricanes had gotten stronger, this Facebook reviewer agreed with him.

In an interesting development, an illegal is under arrest now who is believed to have actually started the fire.

While Stossel fully recognizes Facebook, as a private company, can choose whether to provide him with a platform, he says it has no "legal right to knowingly and recklessly lie about what I say."

He adds, "That's defamation." To underscore this point, he has filed a lawsuit against Facebook.

While the meaning of "fact-checker" is obvious to the public, the public is largely oblivious to the fact some fact-checkers are not. Should one appear at your door this Halloween, undoubtedly, there is a liberal, unconcerned about truth, hiding behind the mask.

Milley's razzle-dazzle at Congress: Less than impressive

Sat, 02 Oct 2021 03:30:13 GMT

MILLEY'S RAZZLE-DAZZLE AT CONGRESS: LESS THAN IMPRESSIVE

James G. Zumwalt / October 1, 2021

World Net Daily ... Six years ago, one of the most incredible plays in football history occurred.

Duke had just pulled ahead of Miami by scoring a touchdown and two-point conversation, taking a 27-24 lead. With six seconds left in the game, Duke kicked off to Miami. Miami caught the ball at its 25-yard line, and following some amazing razzle-dazzle that involved eight laterals, a Miami player reached the end zone with the ball in hand, giving his team a 30-27 miracle win.

Anyone who saw that play and also happened to be watching the congressional testimony recently given by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) Gen. Mark Milley and Central Command's Gen. Kenneth McKenzie may have had flashbacks to the game.

Why? Because the testimony they gave involved similar razzle-dazzle and lateraling to dodge responsibility for the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal and to avoid blaming President Joe Biden.

Milley refused to render an opinion on Biden's mental state, although he did acknowledge, contrary to Biden's assertions, recommending to the president he maintain at least a 2,500-man force in Afghanistan.

When questioning of Milley turned to the call he took from Speaker Pelosi, dealing with her concerns PresidentTrump might start a nuclear war, he gave answers that tended to portray him as lecturing her on the safety valves built into the system rather than as someone – as reported in the book "Peril" – who allegedly agreed with her that Trump was both out of control and "crazy."

Were Milley an honorable man, he would have told Pelosi two things during that phone call.

First , it was inappropriate for her to challenge Trump's presidential authority – a call totally outside her own authority to begin with in her capacity as a representative of the legislative branch...

Second , it was also most inappropriate for her to make such disparaging remarks about the president as she did during the conversation.

He should have quickly rebuked her rather than have listened as Pelosi demonstrated such personal animosity against Trump, stating, "You know he's crazy. He's been crazy for a long time...

...What I'm saying to you is that they couldn't even stop him from an assault (Jan. 6) on the Capitol. Who even knows what else he may do? And, is there anybody in charge at the White House who was doing anything but kissing his fat butt all over this?"

While Pelosi suggested Trump was out of control, she demonstrated the signs of a House speaker out of control.

When questioning turned to Milley's call to his Chinese counterpart, Gen. Li Zuocheng, he justified it by suggesting all he was doing was communicating Trump's intent that he in no way planned to attack China.

He told Li, "I guarantee you that President Trump is not going to attack you in a surprise attack." He explained he felt this was necessary "in order to protect the American people and prevent an escalation or an event."

But that assertion conflicts with something else Milley told Li. He said, if there were a U.S.-initiated attack coming, "I'll call you."

He acknowledged he'd even make such a call again if it were necessary. Perhaps this statement was to insinuate he was somehow honor-bound to provide Li with advanced warning, but it is hard to see how that would "protect the American people" in any way.

Milley's statement drew the ire of Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., who admonished him accordingly.

She charged, "You articulate that, that you would tell him, you would give him a call, is worthy of your resignation. I just think that's against our country that you would call our No. 1 adversary and tell him that."

It would be interesting to know if Milley – were the situation reversed and we had concerns of a China-initiated attack – would trust Li's guarantee of giving Milley prior notice of such an attack. If so, that should raise further concerns about Milley's judgment.

Another lateral was observed during the testimony of Austin when he was asked why we did not rescue American citizens and our Afghan allies. He responded, "On the issue of why we didn't bring out civilians and SIVs sooner, again, the call on how to do that and when to do it is really a State Department call."

He immediately sought to give State a lifeline by adding they had been cautioned by the Afghan government that if U.S. citizens and our Afghan allies were pulled out at too fast a pace, "it would cause a collapse of the government we were trying to prevent."

When Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., expressed concern that the military has become politicized, Milley answered, "I think an apolitical military is critical to the health of this republic." Again, such a response lacked credibility since Milley has subscribed to Critical Race Theory, which uses as a foundational premise that all whites are racist.

Milley fielded calls for him to resign by responding, "I serve at the pleasure of the president." However, "Peril" makes reference to the fact that, during the last days of Trump's tenure, Milley considered having each JCS member resign one-by-one should Trump attempt to remain in office in what would not have been considered an apolitical move.

The more we hear from Milley, the more we understand why Trump's decision in 2018 to promote him from Army chief of staff to CJCS was opposed both by then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and then-CJCS Gen. Joseph Dunford.

When the three witnesses were asked directly by Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., who was to blame for the disastrous withdrawal, they all sat silent for seven seconds. Johnson finally said, "I'll let the silence speak for itself."

There are a lot more answers needed to understand who clearly bears the blame for the disastrous withdrawal. What is becoming apparent, however, is that there is enough blame to go around for all those involved.

That none of the key players has demonstrated the courage either to challenge Biden before he executed a decision all knew would result in abject failure, or even after executing it when all the world knew, is disgraceful.

Serving at the pleasure of a president incapable of knowing what he is doing, resulting in the needless deaths of members of our military, is not serving in the best interests of our country.